Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70058740

Fire rehabilitation effectiveness: a chronosequence approach for the Great Basin

Abstract

Federal land management agencies have invested heavily in seeding vegetation for emergency stabilization and rehabilitation (ES&R) of non-forested lands. ES&R projects are implemented to reduce post-fire dominance of non-native annual grasses, minimize probability of recurrent fire, quickly recover lost habitat for sensitive species, and ultimately result in plant communities with desirable characteristics including resistance to invasive species and resilience or ability to recover following disturbance. Land managers lack scientific evidence to verify whether seeding non-forested lands achieves their desired long-term ES&R objectives. The overall objective of our investigation is to determine if ES&R projects increase perennial plant cover, improve community composition, decrease invasive annual plant cover and result in a more desirable fuel structure relative to no treatment following fires while potentially providing habitat for Greater Sage-Grouse, a species of management concern. In addition, we provide the locations and baseline vegetation data for further studies relating to ES&R project impacts. We examined effects of seeding treatments (drill and broadcast) vs. no seeding on biotic and abiotic (bare ground and litter) variables for the dominant climate regimes and ecological types within the Great Basin. We attempted to determine seeding effectiveness to provide desired plant species cover while restricting non-native annual grass cover relative to post-treatment precipitation, post-treatment grazing level and time-since-seeding. Seedings were randomly sampled from all known post-fire seedings that occurred in the four-state area of Idaho, Nevada, Oregon and Utah. Sampling locations were stratified by major land resource area, precipitation, and loam-dominated soils to ensure an adequate spread of locations to provide inference of our findings to similar lands throughout the Great Basin. Nearly 100 sites were located that contained an ES&R project. Of these sites, 61 were seeded by using a drill, 27 were broadcast aerially, and 12 had a combination of both. We randomly sampled three burned and seeded, burned and unseeded, and unburned and unseeded locations in the vicinity of the fire, each within the same ecological site. We measured foliar cover of all plant functional groups (perennial or annual, shrub, grass, forb, native or introduced), biological soil crusts, and abiotic (bare soil and litter) variables using the line-point intercept protocol. Fuel loads and horizontal fuel continuity were measured. We applied linear mixed models to response variables (cover and density of plant groups) relative to the dependent variables (seeding treatments and precipitation/temperature relationships. Post-fire strengths with native perennial grasses or shrubs in mixes did not increase density or cover of these groups significantly relative to unseeded, burned areas. Seeded non-native perennial grasses and the shrub Bassia prostrata were effective in providing more cover in aerial and drill seedings. Seeded non-native perennial grass cover increased with increased annual precipitation regardless of seeding type. Seeding native shrubs, particularly Artemisia tridentata, did not significantly increase shrub cover in burned areas. Cover of undesirable non-native annual grasses was lower in drill seedings relative to unseeded areas but only at higher elevations. Seeding effectiveness after wildfire is unpredictable in drier, low elevation environments, and our findings indicate management objectives are more likely met when focusing efforts on higher elevation or higher precipitation locations where establishment of perennial grasses is more likely. On sites where potential for invasion and dominance of non-native annuals is high, such as lower and drier sites, intensive methods of restoration that include invasive plant control before seeding may be required. Where establishment of native perennial plants is the goal, managers might consider using native-only seed mixtures, because we found that the non-native perennials typically used in Great Basin restoration efforts are selected for their competitive nature and may reduce establishment of less competitive native species. Although we attempted to include information on livestock grazing history after seedings, we were unable to extract sufficient data from files to address this topic that may play an additional role in understanding native plant abundance post-fire seeding. Evaluation of drill and aerial seeding effects on fuel characteristics focused on two metrics that are standard inputs for fire behavior models, fuel load and fuel continuity. Fuel loads were evaluated separately for total fuel load biomass, and the individual components that sum to total biomass, namely herbaceous, shrub, shrub:herbaceous ratio, litter, 10-hour, and 100-hour fuel biomasses. Fuel continuity was evaluated using the following cover categories, total, annual grass, annual forb, perennial forb perennial grass, shrub, litter, vegetative interspace, and perennial interspace. Drill seeding did not affect fuel loads, except to reduce 10-hour fuels, probably due to mechanical destruction of dead and down fuels by the drill seeding equipment. Drill seeding did affect fuel continuity, specifically decreasing total plant cover by increasing perennial grass cover which suppressed annual grass and litter production resulting in a net decrease in continuity, but only at the elevations above approximately 1500m. Aerial seeding had no effect on any fuel load or fuel continuity category. For the Greater Sage-Grouse habitat study, we developed multi-scale empirical models of sage-grouse occupancy in 211 randomly located plots within a 40 million ha portion of the species’ range. We then used these models to predict sage-grouse habitat quality at 101 ES&R seeding projects. We compared conditions at restoration sites to published habitat guidelines. Sage-grouse occupancy was positively related to plot- and landscape-level dwarf sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula, A. nova, A. tripartita) and big sagebrush steppe, and negatively associated with non-native grass and human development. The predicted probability of sage-grouse occupancy at treated plots was low on average (0.07–0.09) and was not significantly different from burned areas that had not been treated. Restoration was more often successful at higher elevation sites with low annual temperatures, high spring precipitation, and high plant diversity. No plots seeded after fire (n=313) met all overstory guidelines for breeding habitats, but approximately 50% met understory guidelines, particularly for perennial grasses. This trend was similar for summer habitat. Ninety-eight percent of treated plots did not meet winter habitat guidelines. Restoration actions in burned areas did not increase the probability of meeting most guideline criteria. The probability of meeting guidelines was influenced by a latitudinal gradient, local climate, and topography. Post-fire seeding treatments in Great Basin sagebrush shrublands generally have not created high quality habitat for sage-grouse. Understory conditions are more likely to be adequate than those of overstory, but in unfavorable climates, establishing forbs and reducing cheatgrass dominance is unlikely. Reestablishing sagebrush cover will require more than 20 years using the restoration methods of the past two decades. Given current fire frequencies and restoration capabilities, protection of landscapes containing a mix of dwarf sagebrush and big sagebrush steppe, minimal human development, and low non-native plant cover may provide the best opportunity for conservation of sage-grouse habitats. Our database of ES&R locations has used the Land Treatment Digital Library to archive data and location information regarding our study (see Pilliod and Welty 2013). This has contributed to two additional studies. One examined the potential spread of Bassia prostrata (aka Kochia prostrata; forage kochia) from ES&R project locations (Gray and Muir 2013). The second used remote sensing to determine the phenology of vegetation green-up on post-fire seeded sites (Sankey et al. 2013).

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34.43° to 44.82° latitude; -121.42° to -110.78° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

David A. Pyke, David S. Pilliod, Jeanne C. Chambers, Matthew L. Brooks, James Grace. 2009. Fire rehabilitation effectiveness: a chronosequence approach for the Great Basin. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70058740

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Factors affecting benthic macroinvertebrate health in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, 2020–2023

Major waterways in the City of Roanoke (City) have failed to meet Virginia’s aquatic life designated use since 1996. Segments of the upper Roanoke River lack healthy benthic macroinvertebrate communities which prompted a total maximum daily load (TMDL) study by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) to identify the most probable stressor(s) causing the impairment. Excess fine sediment was identified as the most probable stressor impairing benthic macroinvertebrates on portions of the Roanoke River in 2006, and a watershed implementation plan published in 2016 required communities within the impaired watershed to implement projects that would reduce the load of fine sediment entering the Roanoke River. Additional benthic macroinvertebrate sampling and stream habitat assessments along the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek (a tributary to the Roanoke River that flows through the City) revealed continued impaired conditions, and subsequent stressor identification analysis was completed in 2023. Samples collected downstream of the City on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek generally showed more impaired conditions relative to samples collected at locations upstream of the City. Based on this evaluation, sediment and sediment-bound polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were identified as probable stressors while specific conductance, total nitrogen, and sediment metals were possible stressors in Tinker Creek; however, only a sediment TMDL target was identified to address impaired benthic macroinvertebrate communities. In the Roanoke River upstream of the Niagara Dam, sediment and total phosphorus were identified as probable stressors, sediment polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and sediment PCB were considered possible stressors; however, the TMDL target was only for total phosphorus. The City partnered with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 2016 to continuously monitor water quality and streamflow conditions on a major tributary of Tinker Creek, Lick Run, and by 2020, four similar monitoring stations were installed on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek near the locations of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling. Monitored parameters included streamflow and/or gage height (water level), water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and turbidity. Turbidity is a measure of the relative clarity of the water and was previously used to model suspended-sediment concentrations at the monitoring stations. The City also contracted Kirk Environmental, LLP (KE) to collect benthic macroinvertebrate samples and stream habitat assessments near the locations of the water-quality monitoring stations. Identified benthic macroinvertebrates were used to calculate the Virginia Stream Condition Index (SCI), a multi-metric index composed of eight biological attributes that represent elements of the structure and function of the benthic macroinvertebrate community that measure diversity, composition, and tolerance to pollution. Study objective: In this report, benthic macroinvertebrate samples and stream habitat assessment scores collected at four locations on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek by KE and the VDEQ between 2020 and 2023 were compared to measured water-quality and streamflow conditions prior to sampling to evaluate patterns between benthic macroinvertebrate health, water quality, and hydrology.

Virginia