CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 91Fire effects on ecosystemsRangeland and Wildlife ManagementForest Management and Policy

Fuel treatments and fire severity: A meta-analysis

Open access
Martinson, Erik J., Omi, Philip N.·2013
DOI 10.2737/rmrs-rp-103
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We employed meta-analysis and information theory to synthesize findings reported in the literature on the effects of fuel treatments on subsequent fire intensity and severity.Data were compiled from 19 publications that reported observed fire responses from 62 treated versus untreated contrasts.Effect sizes varied widely and the most informative grouping of studies distinguished three vegetation types and three types of fuel treatment.The resultant meta-analytic model is highly significant (p<0.001) and explains 78% of the variability in reported observations of fuel treatment effectiveness.Our synthesis highlights several considerations that both support and inform the current fuels management paradigm.

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 · 10.2737/rmrs-rp-103

Cites

5 of 5 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?

  • Prescribed fire is highly effective at mitigating wildfire behavior as a fuel modification and restoration technique.

    “Prescribed fire has been well recognized within the scientific literature (Hann and Bunnell 2001;Graham et al. 2004;Martinson and Omi 2013) as a fuel modification and restoration technique that is highly effective at mitigating wildfire behavior.”

    From Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management (2015) · cites this paper as Martinson and Omi 2013

    The Management Implications section says treatments that reduce surface fuels, particularly through prescribed burning, are well supported for moderating potential wildfire behavior in long-needle pine and mixed conifer forests. The claim omits those ecosystem limits and describes prescribed fire as a restoration technique, a role not established by the cited passage. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 47

  1. Alexander, M.E.; Lanoville, R.A. 2004. The International Crown Fire Modelling Experiment fuel treatment trials. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings 22: 222.
  2. Burnham, K.P.; Anderson, D.R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information- theoretic approach, second edition. Springer-Verlag New York, NY. 488 p.
  3. Byram, G.M. 1959. Combustion of forest fuels. Pages 61-89 in Davis, K.P. (ed.) Forest fire: control and use. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
  4. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, second edition. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 567 p.
  5. Cruz, M.G.; Alexander, M.E. 2010. Assessing crown fire potential in coniferous forests of western North America: a critique of current approaches and recent simulation studies. International Journal of Wild- land Fire 19: 377-398.
  6. Hedges, L.V.; Olkin, I. 1985. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press. 369 p.
  7. Hudak, A.T.; Rickert, I.; Morgan, P.; Strand, E.; Lewis, S.A.; Robichaud, P.R.; Hoffman, C.; Holden, Z.A. 2011. Review of fuel treatment effectiveness in forests and rangelands and a case study from the 2007 megafires in central, Idaho, USA. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-252: 1-60.
  8. Key, C.; Benson, N. 2006. Landscape assessment, ground measure of severity, the composite burn index, and remote sensing of severity, the normalized burn ratio. In Lutes, D.C.; Keane, R.E.; Caratti, J.F.; Key, C.H.; Benson, N.C.; Gangi, L.J. (eds.) FIREMON, fire effects monitoring and inventory system. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-164-CD: LA-1-55.
  9. Kopper, K.E. 2002. Meta-analysis design and interpretation: a case study of prescribed fire effects on fuel loadings in ponderosa pine ecosystems. Thesis. University of Washington, Seattle.
  10. Martinson, E.J. 1998. Fire effects on plant abundance: a meta-analysis. Thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
  11. Martinson, E.J; Hunter, M.E.; Freeman, J.P.; Omi, P.N. 2008. Effects of fuel and vegetation management activities on non-native invasive plants. Chapter 13 in Zouhar, K.; Kapler, J.; Sutherland, S.; Brooks, M.L. (eds.) Wildland fire in ecosystems: fire and nonnative invasive plants. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 6: 261-268.
  12. Martinson, E.J.; Omi, P.N. 2003. Performance of fuel treatments subjected to wildfires. In Omi, P.N; Joyce, L.A. (eds.) Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration: conference proceedings. USDA Forest Service, Proceedings RMRS-P-29: 7-14.
  13. Martinson, E.J.; Omi, P.N. 2008. Assessing mitigation of wildfire severity by fuel treatments-an example from the Coastal Plain of Mississippi. International Journal of Wildland Fire 17:415-420.
  14. Neary, D.G.; Klopatek, C.C.; DeBano, L.F.; Ffolliott, P.F. 1999. Fire effects on belowground sustainability: a review and synthesis. Forest Ecology and Management 122: 51-71.
  15. Pyne, S.J. 1982. Fire in America-a cultural history of wildland and rural fire. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 654 p.
  16. Rothstein, H.; Sutton, A.; Borenstein, M. (eds.). 2005. Publication bias and meta-analysis: prevention, assessment and adjustments. John Wiley & Sons, Sussex. 356 p.
  17. Ryan, K.C.; Noste, N.V. 1985. Evaluating prescribed fires. In Lotan, J.E. (ed.) Proceedings of the symposium and workshop on wilderness fire. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-GTR-182: 230-238.
  18. Stroup, D.F.; Berlin, J.A.; Morton, S.C.; and others. 2000. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Journal of the American Medical Association 283: 2008-2012.
  19. Van Mantgem, P.; Schwartz, M.; Keifer, M. 2001. Monitoring fire effects for managed burns and wildfires: coming to terms with pseudoreplication. Natural Areas Journal 21: 266-273.
  20. Van Wagner, C.E. 1973. Height of crown scorch in forest fires. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 3: 373-378.
  21. Wells, C.G.; Campbell, R.E.; DeBano, L.F.; Lewis, C.E.; Fredricksen, R.L.; Franklin, E.C; Froelich, R.C.; Dunn, P.H. 1979. Effects of fire on soil: a state-of-the-knowledge review. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report WO-GTR-7: 1-37.
  22. Bradley, T.; Gibson, J.; Bunn, W. 2006. Fire severity and intensity during spring burning in natural and masticated mixed shrub woodlands. USDA Forest Service, Proceedings RMRS-P-41: 419-428.
  23. Cheney, N.P., Gould, J.S., Catchpole, W.R. 1993. The influence of fuel, weather and fire shape variables on fire-spread in grasslands. International Journal of Wildland Fire 3: 31-44.
  24. Cumming, J.A. 1964. Effectiveness of prescribed burning in reducing wildfire damage during periods of abnormally high fire danger. Journal of Forestry 62: 535-537.
  25. Davis, L.S.; Cooper, R.W. 1963. How prescribed burning affects wildfire occurrence. Journal of Forestry 61: 915-917.
  26. Diamond, J.M.; Call, C.A.; Devoe, N. 2009. Effects of targeted cattle grazing on fire behavior of cheatgrass- dominated rangeland in the northern Great Basin, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 18: 944-950.
  27. Fernandes, P.A.M.; Loureiro, C.A.; Botelho, H.S. 2004. Fire behaviour and severity in a maritime pine stand under differing fuel conditions. Annals of Forest Science 61: 537-544.
  28. Hall, W.L.; Wakimoto, R.H.; Zuuring, H.R. 1999. Using fuel treatment and site characteristics to model stand replacement fire in regeneration stands following the 1994 wildfires on the Kootenai National Forest. Pages 151-161 in
  29. Neuenschwander, L.F.; Ryan, K.C.; Gollberg, G.E.; Greer, J.D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Joint Fire Science conference and workshop on crossing the millennium: integrating spatial technologies and ecological principals for a new age in fire management, volume II. University of Idaho, Moscow.
  30. Kallander, H.R. 1969. Controlled burning on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation, Arizona. Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 9: 241-249.
  31. Koehler, J.T. 1992-93. Prescribed burning: a wildfire prevention tool? Fire Management Notes 53-54(4): 9-13.
  32. Kolaks, J.J. 2004. Fuel loading and fire behavior in the Missouri Ozarks of the central hardwood region. Thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia. 115 p.
  33. Martin, G.G. 1988. Fuels treatment assessment-1985 fire season in Region 8. Fire Management Notes 49(4): 21-24.
  34. Martinson, E.J.; Omi, P.N. 2008. Assessing mitigation of wildfire severity by fuel treatments-an example from the Coastal Plain of Mississippi. International Journal of Wildland Fire 17: 415-420.
  35. McCaw, W.L.; Gould, J.S.; Cheney, N.P. 2008. Quantifying the effectiveness of fuel management in modi- fying wildfire behavior. Pages 2-9 in Proceedings of the international bushfire research conference on "fire, environment and society". Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre and Australasian Fire Emergency Service Authorities Council, Adelaide, Australia.
  36. Minnich, R.A.; Chou, Y.H. 1997. Wildland fire patch dynamics in the chaparral of southern California and northern Baja California. International Journal of Wildland Fire 7: 221-248.
  37. Moghaddas, J.J.; Craggs, L. 2007. A fuel treatment reduces fire severity and increases suppression efficiency in a mixed conifer forest. International Journal of Wildland Fire 16: 673-678.
  38. Moore, E.B.; Smith, G.E.; Little, S. 1955. Wildfire damage reduced on prescribe-burn areas in New Jersey. Journal of Forestry 53: 339-341.
  39. Outcalt, K.W.; Wade, D.D. 2004. Fuels management reduces tree mortality from wildfires in southeastern United States. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 28(1): 28-34.
  40. Pollet, J.; Omi, P.N. 2002. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire 11: 1-10.
  41. Prichard, S.; Peterson, D.L. 2010. Do fuel treatments reduce fire severity? Evaluating treatment effectiveness in the 2006 Tripod Complex fires. Final report submitted to the Joint Fire Science Program Governing Board. University of Washington, Seattle. 28 p. Raymond, C.L.; Peterson, D.L. 2005. Fuel treatments alter the effects of wildfire in a mixed-evergreen forest, Oregon, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 35: 2981-2995.
  42. Strom B.A.; Fule, P.Z. 2007. Pre-wildfire fuel treatments affect long-term ponderosa pine forest dynamics. International Journal of Wildland Fire 16: 128-138.
  43. Thompson, J.R.; Spies, T.A.; Ganio, L.M. 2007. Reburn severity in managed and unmanaged vegetation in a large wildfire. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 10743-10748.
  44. Van Wagner, R. 1968. Survival of coniferous plantations following fires in Los Angeles County. Journal of Forestry 66: 622-625.
  45. Vihanek, R.E.; Ottmar, R.D. 1993. When logged units burn in a wildfire, does slash treatment mitigate effects? Proceedings of the Conference on Forest and Fire Meteorology 12: 709-714.
  46. Weaver, H. 1957. Effects of prescribed burning in ponderosa pine. Journal of Forestry 55: 133-138.
  47. Wilson, A.A.G. 1988. Width of firebreak that is necessary to stop grass fires: some field experiments. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 18: 682-687.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martinson, E. J., & Omi, P. N.
Affiliations
  • US Forest Service (US)
  • United States Department of Agriculture (US)
Publisher
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Published
2013
DOI
10.2737/rmrs-rp-103
OpenAlex
W2971447404
Cited by
91
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • Joint Fire Science Program
  • U.S. Forest Service
  • Rocky Mountain Research Station
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
Keywords
fuel treatment, fire severity, fire intensity, prescribed burning, fuel management, vegetation types, wildfire suppression

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