Effects of ownership models on transboundary forest fires


  • 1.

    Stanfield, BJ, Bliss, JC & Spies, TA Land ownership and landscape structure: a spatial analysis of sixty-six watersheds in the Oregon Coast Range (United States). Landsc. School. 17, 685-697 (2002).

    Google Scholar article

  • 2.

    Spies, T. et al. Using an agent-based model to examine the results of forest management in a fire-prone landscape in Oregon, United States. Ecol Soc 22, 25. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08841-220125 (2017).

    Google Scholar article

  • 3.

    Zald, H. & Dunn, CJ Extreme weather conditions and intensive forest management increase the severity of fires in a multi-owner landscape. School. Appl. 28, 1068–1080 (2018).

    Google Scholar article

  • 4.

    Age, AA et al. Forest fire transmission network analysis and implications for risk governance. PLoS A 12, e0172867. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172867 (2017).

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • 5.

    Abatzoglou, J. & Williams, AP Impact of anthropogenic climate change on forest fires in the forests of the western United States. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 11770-11775 (2016).

    ADS CAS Google Scholar Article

  • 6.

    Sheehan, T., Let, DB & Ferschweiler, K. Projected major changes in fires and vegetation in the contiguous Pacific Northwest under some future climate CMIP5. School. Model. 317, 16-29 (2015).

    Google Scholar article

  • 7.

    Spies, TA et al. Examine forest landscapes prone to fire as coupled human and natural systems. School. Soc. 19, 9. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06584-190309 (2014).

    Google Scholar article

  • 8.

    Watkins, TH Unhindered by Man: The Creation of the Wilderness Act of 1964. Audubon 91, 74-90 (1989).

    Google Scholar

  • 9.

    Huffman, DW, Roccaforte, JP, Springer, JD & Crouse, JE. Fire School. 16, 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-020-00077-x (2020).

    Google Scholar article

  • ten.

    Charnley, S., Spies, TA, Barros, AMG, White, EM & Olsen, KA Diversity in Forest Management to Reduce Losses from Forest Fires: Implications for Resilience. School. Soc. 22, 1. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08753-220122 (2017).

    Google Scholar article

  • 11.

    Lake, FK & Long, JW Fire and Tribal Cultural Resources. Report No.PSW-GTR-274, (USDA USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA, 2014).

  • 12.

    Binkley, CS, Aronow, ME, Washburn, CL & New, D. Global perspectives on intensively managed plantations: implications for the Pacific Northwest. J. For. 103, 61-64 (2005).

    Google Scholar

  • 13.

    Palaiologou, P. et al. Small-scale assessment of transboundary forest fires in the western United States. Nat. Dangers Earth Syst. Sci. 19, 1755-1777. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-1755-2019 (2019).

    Google Scholar ADS Article

  • 14.

    Ager, AA, Palaiologou, P., Evers, C., Day, MA & Barros, AM Assessment of forest fire transmission from national forests to communities in the western United States. 52 (USDA Forest Service, 2017).

  • 15.

    Steelman, TUS The governance of forest fires as a socio-ecological problem. School. Soc. 21, 3. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08681-210403 (2016).

    Google Scholar article

  • 16.

    Charnley, S., Kelly, EC & Fischer, AP Promoting Collective Action to Reduce Wildland Fire Risk Across Property Lines in the Western United States. About. Res. Lett. 15, 025007 (2020).

    Google Scholar ADS Article

  • 17.

    USDA Forest Service. Towards shared stewardship across landscapes: an investment strategy focused on results. Report # FS-118, (USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 2018).

  • 18.

    USDA Forest Service. Cohesive national forest fire management strategy. http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/index.shtml (2015).

  • 19.

    Marsik, M. et al. Regional-scale management maps for the forest areas of the Southeastern United States and the United States Pacific Northwest. Sci. Data 5, 1–13 (2018).

    Google Scholar article

  • 20.

    Franklin, JF & Dyrness, CT in General Technical Report PNW-GTR-008 427 (US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 1973).

  • 21.

    Simpson, M. Central Oregon Forest Ecology and Health Program (ed. Pacific Northwest Region USDA Forest Service) (Bend, OR, 2013).

  • 22.

    Mountain biking. Access to MTBS data: limits of burnt areas. https://www.mtbs.gov/index.php/direct-download. (2020).

  • 23.

    Picotte, JJ et al. Changes in surveillance trends in burn severity program mapping production procedures and data products. Fire School. 16, 1–13 (2020).

    Google Scholar article

  • 24.

    Meddens, AJH, Kolden, CA, Lutz, JA, Abatzoglou, J. & Hudak, AT Spatio-temporal models of unburned areas in fire perimeters in the Northwestern United States from 1984 to 2014. Ecosphere 9, e02029 (2018).

    Google Scholar article

  • 25.

    USGS. (USGS Gap Analysis Program (GAP), 2016).

  • 26.

    Gaines, L., Hemstrom, M., Kagan, J. & Salwasser, J. Integrated Landscape Assessment Project Final Report. 62 (The Institute for Natural Resources, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Or, 2013).

  • 27.

    Bond, WJ & Keeley, JE Fire as a global “herbivore”: the ecology and evolution of flammable ecosystems. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 387-394 (2005).

    Google Scholar article

  • 28.

    Manly, B., McDonald, L. and Thomas, D. Selection of resources by animals (Chapman and Hall, 1993).

    Book Google Scholar

  • 29.

    Bajocco, S., Pezzatti, GB, Mazzoleni, S. & Ricotta, C. Seasonality of forest fires and land use: When do wildfires prefer to burn ?. Envrion. Monit. Assess. 164, 445-452 (2010).

    Google Scholar CAS Article

  • 30.

    Bajocco, S. & Ricotta, C. Evidence of selective burning in Sardinia (Italy): Which land use classes do forest fires prefer ?. Landsc. School. 23, 241-248 (2008).

    Google Scholar article

  • 31.

    Barros, AMG & Pereira, JMC Forest fire selectivity for land cover type: does size matter ?. PLoS A 9, e84760 (2014).

    Google Scholar ADS Article

  • 32.

    Package R ‘phuassess’ (2016).

  • 33.

    Fattorini, L., Pisani, C., Riga, F. & Zaccaroni, M. The “phuassess” R package to assess habitat selection using a combination of permutation-based sign tests. Mom. Biol. 83, 64-70 (2017).

    Google Scholar article

  • 34.

    Fattorini, L., Pisani, C., Riga, F. & Zaccaroni, M. A combination of permutation-based sign tests to assess habitat selection. About. School. Stat. 21, 161-187 (2013).

    MathSciNet Google Scholar article

  • 35.

    R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing v.3.5.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2019).

  • 36.

    ArcGIS Desktop: version 10 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, 2011).

  • 37.

    MATLAB 2019a version v. 2019a (The Mathworks, Inc., 2019).

  • 38.

    Collins, B. & Stephens, S. Fire scar models in the Sierra Nevada wilderness scorched by multiple forest fires. Fire School. 3, 53-67 (2007).

    Google Scholar article

  • 39.

    Reilly, MJ et al. Cumulative effects of forest fires on forest dynamics in the eastern Cascades in the United States. School. Appl. 28, 291-308 (2018).

    Google Scholar article

  • 40.

    Johnston, JD, Kilbride, JB, Meigs, GW, Dunn, CJ & Kennedy, RE Does roadless wilderness conservation increase wildfire activity in the national forests of the western United States? . About. Res. Lett. 16, 084040 (2021).

    Google Scholar ADS Article

  • 41.

    Schultz, CA, Thompson, MP & McCaffrey, SM Forest Service Fire Management and the Elusiveness of Change. Fire School. 15, 1-15 (2019).

    Google Scholar article

  • 42.

    Ager, AA, Houtman, R., Day, MA, Ringo, C. & Palaiologou, P. Trade-off between US national forest harvest goals and fuel management to reduce the transmission of forest fires to the urban interface of virgin forest. For. School. To manage. 434, 99-109 (2019).

    Google Scholar article

  • 43.

    NWCG. Guidance for the implementation of the federal forest fire management policy (2009).

  • 44.

    Franklin, JF et al. Extent and distribution of old-growth conditions on forest lands managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources in eastern Washington (Washington Department of Natural Resources 2007).

  • 45.

    Stephens, SL et al. Fire and climate change: The conservation of seasonally dry forests is still possible. Before. School. About. 18, 354-360 (2020).

    Google Scholar article

  • 46.

    Long, J., Lake, FK, Lynn, K. & Viles, C. Tribal eco-cultural resources and engagement. Report No. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-966, 851-917 (USDA – USFS, 2018).

  • 47.

    Scott, JH & Burgan, RE Standard Burning Behavior Fuel Models: A Complete Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Model. Report No. RMRS-GTR-153, 72 (USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2005).

  • 48.

    Fernandes, PM, Pacheco, AP, Almeida, R. & Claro, J. The role of the fire suppression force in limiting the spread of extremely large forest fires in Portugal. EUR. J. For. Res. 135, 253–262 (2016).

    Google Scholar article

  • 49.

    WADNR, WD o. NR Forest Health Assessment and Treatment Framework (RCW 76.06.200) (Washington State Department of Natural Resources, 2020).

  • 50.

    Collins, BM & Stephens, SL Managing natural forest fires in the Sierra Nevada wilderness areas. Before. School. About. 5, 523-527 (2007).

    Google Scholar article

  • 51.

    Holden, ZA, Morgan, P., Rollins, MG, and Kavanagh, K. Effects of multiple forest fires on ponderosa pine stand structure in two wilderness areas in the southwest, United States. Fire School. 3, 18-33 (2007).

    Google Scholar article

  • 52.

    Hunter, ME, Iniguez, JM & Farris, CA (US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2014).

  • Leave A Reply

    Your email address will not be published.