This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles
This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Quikshot.
Just as a notice, I am currently working on a full-scale revision of this page that will include an overview of peer-reviewed scientific research in fire ecology, case studies on the role that fire and fire suppression play in ecological communities, and current policies concerning fire. I expect to have a draft of the page ready by the end of January, and I look forward to members of the national and international community filling in the gaps I leave because of my western US bias. --Melpomene107 20:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC). Keep reading for more information.[reply]
Looking forward to it. --Allen 21:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just as an update, what I have written for this page is currently undergoing peer review to ensure accuracy and readability. I expect it to be up soon. --Melpomene107 19:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I just put the first version up. I will be toying with the formatting for the next hour or so. If everyone is okay with this after a week, I will delete the old stub, the contents of which I included in my text.--Melpomene107 03:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I can't look at it anymore. Tweak away, and if you have pictures, that would be awesome! I don't want to deal with all of the copyright stuff. --Melpomene107 04:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great job. Thanks for all your work. This was definitely a hole in Wikipedia's scope. --Allen 05:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Mel. thanks for picking up my stub and taking it on to the next stage. I got caught up with other things, like travelling to Laos. You have done a good job but I think it is too narrowly based. You acknowledge that you are coming from a Nth California perspective and have made brief reference to Fynbos of South Africa for instance but there are many more fire dependent ecosystems around the world which you could/should list. These can have very different responses to fire than Chapparal or conifer forests.) For example the Eucalypt forest of eastern Australia can show a quite different pattern of fire responses, such as greater predominance of serotiny, fire stimulated flowering, increased diversity after fire, seed hardness, ant/seed commensalism to mention a few.
I would strongly dispute your statement that "Fire-intolerant species tend to be highly flammable and completely destroyed by fire". Studies in leaf flammability with australian species (sorry I don't have the reference at hand) do not support this. Rainforest is the most important group that are often killed by fire but certainly do not have "highly flammable" leaves.
I also have a problem with you listing "Fire Severity" as a component of fire regime. I have not read Bond and Keeley but measurement of "severity" is so subjective that I question its value.
I would be happy to work with you to "broaden" the ambit of the entry but unfortunately I do not have any of my references here with me - Ironbark
I think there may be opportunity alter the plant responses from purely 'tolerant' and 'intolerant' as some species while being killed are highly adapted to fire (ie fire weeds or as Ironbark pointed out, the serotinous shrubs). I think tolerance to fire in a successional sense (ie fire intolerant communities such as rainforest) could be separated from response to fire in a reproductive sense (Ie how each species responds to fire, such as resprouting or reseeding). I've a few references, so will have a think about it. - Clovis Sangrail
I would like to broaden this a bit with what we are doing to restore forests to a more historical composition and structure in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Maybe another page would be more appropriate? Also someone needs to look at the statement that suggests mechanical treatments increase fire severity. Yes that was true when we were prescribing over story removal with lop and scatter of slash, but that is old school. Now we thin from below and either mechanically treat the slash or pile and burn the slash. Whole tree skidding and using stroke delimbers is really nice because we can use the logs for products and the slash for the cogeneration plant at the Nevada State Penitentiary. I can put fire back into a forest that has been properly treated and we only get negligible torching and scorching. I definitely have a northern California bias, maybe that should be a page so we can dive deeply into the science and controversies? 24.182.26.138 21:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)John Pickett.[reply]
"Incident: Station Fire Wildfire
Released: 3 days ago
ANGELES NATIONAL FOREST STATION FIRE BAER: WATERSHED RAPID ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE
There are three phases of rehabilitation following wildfires on federal lands: Fire Suppression Repair; Burned Area Emergency Response; and Long-term Recovery.
Fire Suppression Repair is a series of immediate post-fire actions taken to repair damages and minimize environmental impacts resulting from fire suppression activities and is usually began after the fire is contained and before the demobilization of an Incident Management Team. This work rehabilitates the hand and dozer firelines, roads, trails, staging areas, safety zones, and drop points used during fire suppression efforts.
BAER -The Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program is a rapid assessment of burned watersheds by BAER teams to identify unacceptable post-fire threats and implement emergency treatments to reduce unacceptable risks before the first major storm or damaging event. The fire results in a loss of vegetation, exposure of the soil to erosion and increased water runoff that may lead to flooding and increased sediment and debris flows. BAER treatments such as the installation of erosion and runoff water control devices; temporary barriers to protect recovering areas; warning signs; and drainage features for increased flow may be implemented. BAER work may also replace safety related facilities; remove safety hazards; prevent permanent loss of habitat for threatened and endangered species; and prevent the spread of noxious weeds.
Long-Term Recovery utilizes non-emergency actions that are done within three years or more after fire containment to improve fire-damaged lands that are unlikely to recover naturally and to repair or replace facilities damaged by the fire that are not critical to life safety. This phase may include restoring burned habitat, monitoring fire effects, replacing burned fences, interpreting cultural sites, treating pre-existing noxious weed infestations, and installing interpretive signs."
I think that this article is a little biased. True, wilfires form part of certain ecosystems, but the article should also state the detrimental effects on endangered ecosystems and endangered species they have on them as well as on old growth forests which are endangered and
and are vital for some endangered species. And some "prescribed fires" are set to plant species that are only beneficial to lumber companies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.174.181 (talk) 14:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spelling and grammar seem to be OK, but the style/tone could still be improved. Article seems a bit long and sounds like a term paper. Not sure what to fix here. Trelawnie (talk) 04:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully disagree; find article excellent in coverage, citations, and additional references. Can be a contentious topic, but tone here is not.---Look2See1 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually coverage is focused on North America, and barely even touches on broad areas of ecological fire sciences, particularly in frequently burnt ecosystems (mediterranean types (Heathlands, Garrigue, Fynbos, Eucalypt forests etc)). I think style could focus a little more on defining the science (regime & responses) rather than context (Smokey Bear) Clovis Sangrail (talk) 07:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]
I've noticed a number of errors, and will look to correct these over the next few weeks. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 07:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I enjoyed copy editing this article a lot; it is a fascinating subject. I hope I haven't scrambled anything but I have recast some of the more technical sentences into simpler terms and Wikified the section headings. One important thing: near the beginning of the article, where soil nutrients are discussed, the impression given is that nutrients are usually depleted after the passage of a wildfire. This jars with statements later, such as in the section on the Great Plains shortgrass prairie, that fire may be necessary to maintain and restore nutrient levels in an ecosystem. Perhaps slightly more discussion of soil nutrients in the section 'Abiotic responses' would help. Richard asr (talk) 10:50, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The forest fires in Alberta prompted me to look at this page and I noticed some discussion of fire in other ecosystems, such as Mediterranean ones. In Britain there is political pressure to burn moorlands because they support a lucrative grouse-shooting industry of some 150 years standing. The vegetation of these moorlands is derived almost entirely from peatlands, in which fire will not have played an important role, but as a consequence of a century or so of burning, they have lost most of their structure, species richness, and carbon sequestration capacity. However, those who burn these altered ecosystems now argue increased burning frequency is necessary to control the above ground biomass and prevent wildfires - the same argument for increased (managed) fire frequency we are hearing from Canada. There is far less awareness in Britain of fire ecology, however (we are an oceanic country in which natural fires were presumably less frequent), and certainly no appreciation that whereas those calling for more tolerance of fire in North America might have an eye to the natural characteristics of an ecosystem, those in Britain are looking for arguments to bolster an economic case for the intensive management of natural and seminatural vegetation.Markwick Haffenden (talk) 10:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to). Walter Siegmund(talk) 16:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
On 2017-12-12 an image was removed to make the article seem less Ameri-centric (Map of potential different regimes of natural burning in natural ecosystems of the United States. Colors denote both the frequency of wildfires and their style of burning. Before European colonization, wildfires occurred most frequently in the tan, yellow, blue, pink, and light green areas. This map should not be considered definitive.) - the text was not updated to reflect that removal. Removed: The map below right, shows one view of how ecosystem type in the United States has a characteristic frequency of fire, ranging from once every 10 years to once every 500 years. Natural disturbances can be described by key factors such as frequency, intensity and area.[1] The map also shows intensity, since some fires are understory fires (light burns that affect mostly understory plants) while others are stand replacement fires (intense fires that tend to kill the adult trees as well.)
~ender 2018-04-24 8:42:AM MST
This article remains US-centric. The coverage of Australia is dreadfully sketchy, yet to cover Australia adequately would make this article even more ridiculously long. I think fires in Australia probably demand an article of their own. This article has a paragraph to describe a continent, and its illustration is a burnt exotic pine plantation! Perhaps you should just leave it out. I would prefer an article covering the US only with links to related articles on the same topic. My preference is always for something readable, and to the point. I think the article is far too ambitious, and would prefer a series of smaller related articles, with appropriate links to each other. MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 2 external links on Fire ecology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on Fire ecology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I feel that the effects of ash on the nutrient content and its effects on the water content (through water retention and how it affects the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of the soils) can be added to this discussion [1][2][3]
"Addition of ash to the soils also increases nutrient contents [2]"
"Immediately following a fire however, ash can wash or permeate into the soil, clogging the soil pores, leading to decreased infiltration rates by reducing the hydraulic conductivity, thereby contributing to increased water retention in soils as well [4][5]"
Possible sources:
Effect of fire and ash on soil water retention [1]
Physical Properties of Fly Ash-Amended Soils [2]
Physical and chemical properties of wood ash [3]
The effect of fire-induced surface heterogeneity on rainfall-runoff-erosion relationships in an eastern Mediterranean ecosystem, Israel[4]
The effect of ash on runoff and erosion after a severe forest wildfire, Montana, USA [5]
[1] Stoof, Cathelijne R.; Wesseling, Jan G.; Ritsema, Coen J. "Effects of fire and ash on soil water retention". Geoderma. 159 (3-4): 276–285. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.08.002.
[2] Chang, A. C.; Lund, L. J.; Page, A. L.; Warneke, J. E. (1977-07-09). "Physical Properties of Fly Ash-Amended Soils1". Journal of Environment Quality. 6 (3). ISSN 0047-2425. doi:10.2134/jeq1977.00472425000600030007x.
[3] Etiégni, L.; Campbell, A.G. "Physical and chemical characteristics of wood ash". Bioresource Technology. 37 (2): 173–178. doi:10.1016/0960-8524(91)90207-z.
[4] Kutiel, P.; Lavee, H.; Segev, M.; Benyamini, Y. "The effect of fire-induced surface heterogeneity on rainfall-runoff-erosion relationships in an eastern Mediterranean ecosystem, Israel". CATENA. 25 (1-4): 77–87. doi:10.1016/0341-8162(94)00043-e.
[5] Woods, Scott W.; Balfour, Victoria N. (2008). "The effect of ash on runoff and erosion after a severe forest wildfire, Montana, USA". International Journal of Wildland Fire. 17 (5): 535–548. doi:10.1071/wf07040.
I have just modified one external link on Fire ecology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Wiki Education assignment: Current Topics in Environmental Biology[edit]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 8 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): EcologyNoiseCake (article contribs).
T.Wang_ex_Cheng.JPG){kind=small}
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Quikshot.
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
