Cited by 1,423Fire effects on ecosystemsRangeland and Wildlife ManagementBurn Injury Management and Outcomes

A Project for Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity

Open access
Eidenshink, Jeff, Schwind, Brian, Brewer, Ken, Zhu, Zhi-Liang, Quayle, Brad, Howard, Stephen·2007·Fire Ecology

Abstract

Elected officials and leaders of environmental agencies need information about the effects of large wildfires in order to set policy and make management decisions. Recently, the Wildland Fire Leadership Council (WFLC), which implements and coordinates the National Fire Plan (NFP) and Federal Wildland Fire Management Policies (National Fire Plan 2004 ), adopted a strategy to monitor the effectiveness of the National Fire Plan and the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA). One component of this strategy is to assess the environmental impacts of large wildland fires and identify the trends of burn severity on all lands across the United States. To that end, WFLC has sponsored a six-year project, Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity (MTBS), which requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDA-FS) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to map and assess the burn severity for all large current and historical fires. Using Landsat data and the differenced Normalized Burn Ratio (dNBR) algorithm, the USGS Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) and USDA-FS Remote Sensing Applications Center will map burn severity of all fires since 1984 greater than 202 ha (500 ac) in the east, and 404 ha (1,000 ac) in the west. The number of historical fires from this period combined with current fires occurring during the course of the project will exceed 9,000. The MTBS project will generate burn severity data, maps, and reports, which will be available for use at local, state, and national levels to evaluate trends in burn severity and help develop and assess the effectiveness of land management decisions. Additionally, the information developed will provide a baseline from which to monitor the recovery and health of fire-affected landscapes over time. Spatial and tabular data quantifying burn severity will augment existing information used to estimate risk associated with a range of current and future resource threats. The annual report of 2004 fires has been completed. All data and results will be distributed to the public on a Web site.

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 · 10.4996/fireecology.0301003

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • MTBS is currently the best dataset available for the purpose of this analysis because it contains the largest historical record of CONUS wildland fires larger than 405 ha in the West and larger than 202 ha in the East between 1984 and 2016, and was mapped at high resolution (30 × 30 m).

    “MTBS is currently the best dataset available for the purpose of this analysis, because it contains the largest historical record of CONUS wildland fires larger than 405 ha (1000 acres) in the West, and larger than 202 ha (500 acres) in the East, respectively, between 1984 and 2016.”

    From Burned forests impact water supplies (2018) · cites this paper as [27]

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: 2

  1. Gmelin, M., and K. Brewer. 2002. Operational change detection-based fi re severity mapping using Landsat TM data. P. 1-8 in Rapid delivery of remote sensing products [electronic resource]: proceedings of the Ninth Forest Service Remote Sensing Applications Conference, Greer, J. (ed.). ASPRS, San Diego, California.
  2. Key, C.H., and N.C. Benson. 2002. Measuring and remote sensing of burn severity, U.S. Geological Survey wildland fi re workshop.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eidenshink, J., Schwind, B., Brewer, K., Zhu, Z.-L., Quayle, B., & Howard, S.
Affiliations
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
  • US Forest Service (US)
Corresponding author
Eidenshink, Jeff
Venue
Fire Ecology
Published
2007-06
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
3-21
ISSN
1933-9747 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2138800506
Cited by
1,423
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 110 · 2025: 118 · 2024: 138 · 2023: 101 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 96 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 112 · 2018: 100 · 2017: 73 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 77 · 2014: 64 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 42
FWCI
6.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Fire Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • U.S. Forest Service
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
Keywords
burn severity, Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity, National Fire Plan, forest fires, dNBR, Landsat, fire policy, fire risk assessment

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