Get a FREE Issue of Earth Island Journal
Sign up for our no-risk offer today.

Go Back: Home > Earth Island Journal > Latest News > Post and Comments

Latest News

The Yosemite Rim Fire Revisited

The forest is coming back to life; Forest Service plan to log there is a bad idea

After the massive Rim Fire occurred last year in the Stanislaus National Forest and Yosemite National Park of California’s Sierra Nevada, representatives from the U.S. Forest Service fanned the flames of fear and misunderstanding regarding wildland fire. In a news article published shortly after the fire was contained, a Forest Service official claimed that a 38,000-acre area was a “moonscape” that had been “nuked” by the Rim Fire, creating a lifeless environment where soils had been sterilized and nothing would grow. (By the time it was contained, the Rim Fire had affected 257,171 acres.) The Forest Service also claimed the high-severity burn covered some 63,000 acres and that those areas “may not see trees in them for a long time.”
no conifer forest would regenerate unless the Forest Service removed “fuels” and created artificial tree plantations.

photo of duff photo of lupinesPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 1. (a) Natural post-fire conifer regeneration hundreds of meters from the nearest live tree, Rim fire; and b) a carpet of lupines in a large high-intensity fire patch, Rim fire.(click to view slideshow)

forest photo forest photoPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 2. (a) Deer browse on post-fire regrowth in a high-intensity fire patch, Rim fire; and (b) frogs forage adjacent to streams in large high-intensity fire patches in the Rim fire.

forest photo forest photoPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 3. (a) Oaks naturally regenerating in a high-intensity fire patch, Rim fire; and (b) oaks, flowers, and grasses regenerating deep inside one of the largest high-intensity fire patches, Rim fire.

Nature, however, begs to differ. Already, in the first spring after the smoke cleared, a very different story is unfolding – a story of ecological rejuvenation and richness. Even in the largest high-intensity fire patches, where the fire burned hottest, there are now dozens, hundreds, and in some cases thousands of naturally regenerated conifer seedlings per acre. Oaks are sprouting, shrubs and grasses are growing, and a wild jumble of colorful flowers cover the landscape. Woodpeckers, warblers and many other bird species already inhabit the high-intensity fire patches. Deer are browsing on the post-fire regrowth. This is anything but a lifeless environment. It is a rich, vibrant, growing ecosystem that is full of wildlife.

It’s important that the public understands the restorative power of fire, because right now the Forest Service is using the widespread misunderstanding of fire to propose one of the largest and most destructive commercial logging projects in the history of the National Forest system. The Forest Service’s “Rim Fire logging project” would essentially clear cut about 44,000 acres of ecologically vital “snag forest habitat”. This tractor logging would not only remove nearly all of the snags – which provide food and shelter for birds such as the black-backed woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, wrens, bluebirds, flickers and many others – but would also crush and kill most of the natural conifer and other regeneration that is occurring in the Rim fire on the Stanislaus National Forest. According to Randi Spivak of the Center for Biological Diversity: “It’s little more than an excuse to cut old trees in forests that would otherwise be protected.”

Certainly, a patch of ground with little or no vegetation can be found in the Rim Fire area if one looks hard enough – but such a space will not be very large. The natural regeneration now occurring is the rule, not the exception, even in the most intensely burned areas.

While there is vigorous regrowth occurring even in the high-intensity fire patches, it’s crucial to note there was not nearly as much high-intensity fire as initially reported. In fact, the fire’s effects were far more variable than the Forest Service claimed. Using the Forest Service’s own fire intensity data from satellite imagery, we can see that the largest high-intensity fire patches within conifer forest were about 1,000 to 7,000 acres in size – not 63,000 acres. And there are numerous pockets of surviving trees within these high-intensity fire patches, contrary to Forest Service claims.  

forest photo forest photoPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 4. (a) Shrubs regenerating after intense fire in the Rim fire; and (b) grasses and oaks regenerating in a large high-intensity fire patch, Rim fire.

One of the most striking phenomena currently occurring in the Rim Fire area is the “flushing” of new foliage in conifers that appeared to be dead, but were not. These are trees, especially ponderosa pines, that had zero remaining live needles after the fire. But the buds survived at the ends of branches in the upper portion of the tree crowns. Now thousands and thousands of such trees are producing new green needles through a process called “flushing.” Many if not most of these trees will survive long-term, providing natural seed sources in countless places within large, high-intensity fire patches. In fact, in some areas that were mapped as having experienced high-intensity fire, the flushing is revealing that most trees are alive, even though they all appeared dead until just a few weeks ago.

forest photo forest photoPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 5. Post-fire “flushing” in ponderosa pines, Rim fire.

Of course, there are also pockets in which all of the trees truly were killed in the fire. Such areas often pose the greatest challenge to human understanding. Many people tend to think of forests the same way they think of their homes and other possessions, mistakenly believing that since a fire will destroy a home, it must do the same to the forest. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the pockets where all of the trees are dead create “snag forest habitat,” which scientists now know is one of the most ecologically rich, rare, and most threatened of all forest habitat types in the Western US. We have much less of this habitat now than we did historically, due to fire suppression and post-fire logging policies. Last October,  some 250 scientists sent a letter to Congress regarding the Rim Fire and urging lawmakers to appreciate the high ecological value of this habitat, and not weaken or roll-back federal environmental laws. The scientists concluded:

Though it may seem at first glance that a post-fire landscape is a catastrophe ecologically, numerous scientific studies tell us that even in patches where forest fires burned most intensely the resulting post-fire community is one of the most ecologically important and biodiverse habitat types in western conifer forest. Post-fire conditions serve as a refuge for rare and imperiled wildlife that depend upon the unique habitat features created by intense fire. These include an abundance of standing dead trees or “snags” that provide nesting and foraging habitat for woodpeckers and many other wildlife species, as well as patches of native flowering shrubs that replenish soil nitrogen and attract a diverse bounty of beneficial insects that aid in pollination after fire…This post-fire habitat, known as “complex early seral forest,” is quite simply some of the best wildlife habitat in forests and is an essential stage of natural forest processes. Moreover, it is the least protected of all forest habitat types and is often as rare, or rarer, than old-growth forest, due to damaging forest practices encouraged by post-fire logging policies.

forest photoPhotos by Chad Hanson, 2014.Figure 6. A patch of snag forest habitat surrounded by areas
with lower-intensity fire effects, Rim fire.

We are discovering that many of the things we thought were true about forest fires were quite incorrect, and nowhere was the disconnection between fact and mythology more evident than in the early reporting on the Rim Fire. Self-serving rhetoric from the US Forest Service (which keeps many millions of dollars each year from timber sales revenue) and timber industry proponents were treated as truth, and wild speculation from locals was reported as credible information. For example, the Sacramento Bee quoted an unsubstantiated assertion from a local pro-logging person who claimed that “tens of millions” of animals were killed in the Rim Fire, supposedly because the flames moved so fast that few animals could fly or run fast enough to escape. In reality, according to the government’s own maps the Rim Fire’s daily progression, the fire only moved at about one-half of one mile per hour on the fastest days. So, with rare exceptions, animals simply moved out of the way of the fire as it advanced. Also, numerous newspapers published quotes from Forest Service and timber industry representatives making extreme statements about the severity of the Rim Fire within conifer forests. Actually, of the 257,171 acres that burned, about 151,258 acres was in conifer forest; the remainder was grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, or rock outcroppings. Of the mature forest that burned on federal lands, only 29 percent burned at high intensity – well within the natural range of variability. And, as discussed above, these high-intensity fire areas contain many pockets of trees that actually survived the fire, so this estimate is likely high. Thus, even in this very large fire, only a minor portion of it created snag forest habitat.  
 
Unfortunately, the misinformation continues. In addition to its post-fire logging plans, the Forest Service wants to conduct a massive program to remove native flowering shrubs and create artificial tree plantations. This is a major ecological threat, because native shrubs attract flying insects that provide food for birds and bats, contributing to the amazing and abundant biological diversity of these snag forest patches. Also, because of fire suppression and post-fire management practices – logging, and killing of shrubs with herbicides–we have far less of this native shrub habitat now than we did historically. Currently, several shrub-nesting bird species associated with high-intensity fire areas are experiencing protracted population declines in the Sierra Nevada, including the orange-crowned warbler, yellow warbler, wrentit, and Brewer’s blackbird. And yet the Forest Service has refused recommendations from scientists, including its own, to (a) preserve more than 75 percent of the snag forest habitat created on national forest lands; and (b) avoid logging during nesting season, when chicks are in the nest but cannot yet fly (logging during this season results in the unnecessary death of thousands of birds).

What you can do

Send an email to Susan Skalski (comments-pacificsouthwest-stanislaus@fs.fed.us), Supervisor, Stanislaus National Forest, by June 14. Urge her to: a) withdraw the Forest Service’s massive post-fire logging proposal in the Rim fire area; and b) protect the snag forest habitat created by the Rim fire, and withdraw current plans to create artificial tree plantations and remove/reduce shrubs.

The Forest Service’s primary justification given for this enormous clearcutting project on federal public lands is that the agency wants to recover “economic value” from the standing fire-killed trees in order to enhance the agency’s own budget. Under a little-known law called the “Salvage Sale Fund”, the Forest Service keeps 100 percent of the revenue from selling public timber to private logging companies, creating a perverse financial incentive. Tellingly, the agency characterizes (see link above) the snags in the fire area as a “commodity.” The Forest Service also claims that post-fire logging (mostly clearcutting) will remove “fuels” and reduce future fire intensity. However, scientific studies that have investigated this question have found that post-fire logging does not reduce future fire intensity, and often increases it since such logging removes relatively inflammable large snags and places more combustible branches and twigs on the ground all at once.

There is no need for human intervention to “restore” the Rim Fire area. If we can set aside decades of misinformed prejudice about wild fire, we will see that ecological restoration is occurring, naturally, right before our eyes. There is a message emanating from this landscape, telling us that fires in our forests – including large, intense fires – are restorative events that create unique, rich habitats. We do not need to be afraid. Rather, we should celebrate the rejuvenating effect of mixed-intensity fire in our forests. We need to learn to appreciate the forest ecosystem for all of its parts – not just live, green trees, but also snags, downed logs, and shrubs resulting from nature’s most important ecological force in Western US conifer forests: fire.  

Chad Hanson is the director of the John Muir Project of Earth Island Institute. He has a Ph.D. in Ecology from the University of California at Davis, and focuses his research on fire ecology in conifer forests of California and the western US. For more information, watch a video of Dr. Hanson’s recent presentation on the restorative virtues of the Rim Fire, and the ecological value of snag forest habitat (vimeo.com/95535429), visit www.johnmuirproject.org, or email: cthanson1@gmail.com.

Chad Hanson
Chad Hanson, the director of the John Muir Project (JMP) of Earth Island Institute, has a Ph.D. in ecology from the University of California at Davis, and focuses his research on forest and fire ecology in the Sierra Nevada. He can be reached at cthanson1@gmail.com, or visit JMP’s website at www.johnmuirproject.org for more information, and for citations to specific studies pertaining to the points made in this article.

Email this post to a friend.

Write to the editor about this post.

Subscribe Today
cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJFour issues of the award-winning
Earth Island Journal for only $10

 

Comments

Hi JS and other readers

Thank you for your comments.  You managed to read through my bias!  Yes, I am a forester (but not a logger).  Although I never have been a US Forest Service employee I have been an inventory (mostly FIA) contractor for the Forest Service since 1978 and I have worked on the ground throughout all 19 of the national forests in California.  FYI my website is www.forestdata.com.

The points are these:
1. Generations of people have successfully excluded fire from our forests for a century. 
2. Today these forests are choked with forest fuels and when they ignite, these forests burn destructively, furiously and apocalyptically. 
3. The transformation of our forests and shrublands to brushy early successional stages is climate change itself, and consequently we are seeing huge losses of biodiversity on our public lands.
4.  Logging is simply a tool with limited effect on the outcome.
5.  As educated people let us address the real issues.

Tom Gaman

By Tom Gaman on Fri, August 29, 2014 at 11:27 am

Tom Gaman’s response uses some apocalyptic but contradictory language.  A black oak “standing dead, but newly sprouting from the base…” sounds to me like a tree that’s regenerating. 

Then, we hear that we will have to “depend on nature” for thousands of acres that will never be “logged or salvaged.”  Those buzzwords almost sound to me like they could have come from someone involved in forestry or logging as a profession, or who works for or with the USFS. If Mr. Gaman could clear up my confusion, is that the case here, or is he not involved in these industries?  Regardless, is depending on nature to do what nature sees fit to do on national forest lands really a bad thing?

By JS on Mon, August 25, 2014 at 9:47 am

Below is a copy-to-browser link to a few photos of the Rim Fire which I took at random locations (some turned out to be in plantations) during August 2014, 1 dry year following the fire.

tgaman.wix.com/rimfire

The fire is not as “patchy” as nature might normally create.  The devastation is profound and scars of highest fire intensity cover enormous areas.  When the wind blows trees collapse as enormous pickup sticks.  Even the black oak trees are standing dead, though newly sprounting from the base. 

The duff and litter burned along with most trees, the soils and rock are exposed over entire watersheds, ready to wash into the river.  Recent summer rains have already dug deep gullies and washouts.  Soil is already gone from the steepest canyon slopes.

This brown and black landscape will regenerate, but for now it is a huge and sad loss of habitat for years to come. The creatures, even the birds, are few.  We will depend on nature to heal hundreds of thousands of acres will never be logged or salvaged. Yes, little ponderosa pines are regenerating well.  Manzanitas are sprouting, fire-following lupines and other forbs are doing well in some locations.  Our mid-elevation public forests are sadly predisposed to enormous conflagration as diversity diminishes.

By Tom Gaman on Sat, August 23, 2014 at 4:37 pm

I returned recently from Yosemite where the evidence of the fire is clearly visible but to my surprise, was not anything like the devastation news reports last of last year led me to believe I would see. In the areas affected within the park affected by the fire which I saw from route 120, a majority of the trees have green foliage and the appearance is of regeneration not devastation. Thanks for this article which helps me understand the discrepancy between what I observed and what I expected from the way the fire was reported.

By AW on Tue, July 01, 2014 at 1:27 pm

Thank you so much for this superb scientific and thoughtful article. I am concerned that the Bay Area’s beloved Camp Tuolumne, a family camp owned by the City of Berkeley since 1922, and burned badly in the Rim Fire, will be forever lost if they clear-cut the region to the point where a historic camp cannot live anymore. The Friends of Berkeley Tuolumne Camp (FOBTC) and the Tuolumne River Trust have joined efforts to garner public support and have a voice that represents the same wisdom you write about. We will spread this article far and wide. Thank you!

By Scott Gelfand on Fri, June 27, 2014 at 9:44 am

Thank you for your continuing work to bring the facts about natural disruptions, such as fire, to the fore.  I do note that, aside from the economic arguments put forwards by the Forest Service for salvage logging and plantation forestry, I’ve also heard the idea advanced by many Forest Service employees that these practices are somehow “needed” to insure conifer regen, and by extension to protect forest ecosystems.  Not only did regen happen just fine in the past without plantation forestry, but to date there seems to be zero scientific support for the notion that plantation forestry benefits ecosystems above and beyond natural regen. 

I have no problem with plantation forestry itself, just like I don’t mind corn farming (also a very artificial, quasi-industrial practice that limits diversity—try finding gamebirds in many portions of the Midwest given over to modern farming practices).  If we really want to devote a portion of national forests to quasi-industrial agriculture such as plantation forestry, have a clear and honest policy decision and sell those portions of national forests to private interests, who then are left to pay full freight for all the costs of ownership, including future fire suppression.  I find the false claims of benefit by the Forest Service for what is at core a business decision to be troubling.

By JS on Wed, June 18, 2014 at 9:38 am

Leave a comment

Comments Policy

Remember my personal information?

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

View Posts by Date View Posts by Author

Subscribe
Today

Four issues for just
$10 a year.

cover thumbnail EIJ

Join Now!

 
get tickets to the 15th annual Brower Youth Awards!

0.1375