
From SMU (Southern Methodist University) comes this press release which really isn’t surprising. North America didn’t have a forest fire suppression program for the last 1400 years, so there wasn’t a fuel buildup issue like we have today, forest floors were cleansed naturally by non-catastrophic fires.
Ancient tree-ring records from southwest U.S. suggest today’s megafires are truly unusual
Unprecedented study relies on more than 1,500 years of tree-ring data and hundreds of years of fire-scar records gathered from Ponderosa Pine forests
Today’s mega forest fires of the southwestern U.S. are truly unusual and exceptional in the long-term record, suggests a new study that examined hundreds of years of ancient tree ring and fire data from two distinct climate periods.
Researchers constructed and analyzed a statistical model that encompassed 1,500 years of climate and fire patterns to test, in part, whether today’s dry, hot climate alone is causing the megafires that routinely destroy millions of acres of forest, according to study co-author and fire anthropologist Christopher I. Roos, Southern Methodist University, Dallas.
The researchers found that even when ancient climates varied from each other — one hotter and drier and the other cooler and wetter — the frequencies of year-to-year weather patterns that drive fire activity were similar.
The findings suggest that today’s megafires, at least in the southwestern U.S., are atypical, according to Roos and co-author Thomas W. Swetnam, the University of Arizona. Furthermore, the findings implicate as the cause not only modern climate change, but also human activity over the last century, the researchers said.
“The U.S. would not be experiencing massive large-canopy-killing crown fires today if human activities had not begun to suppress the low-severity surface fires that were so common more than a century ago,” said Roos, an assistant professor in the SMU Department of Anthropology.
Today’s extreme droughts caused by climate change probably would not cause megafires if not for a century of livestock grazing and firefighting, which have combined to create more dense forests with accumulated logs and other fuels that now make them more vulnerable than ever to extreme droughts. One answer to today’s megafires might be changes in fire management.
“If anything, what climate change reminds us is that it’s pretty urgent that we deal with the structural problems in the forests. The forests may be equipped to handle the climate change, but not in the condition that they’re currently in. They haven’t been in that condition before,” Roos said.
Roos and Swetnam, director of the University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, published their findings in the scientific journal The Holocene.
Study combines fire-scar records and tree-ring data of U.S. southwest
This new study is based on a first-of-its-kind analysis that combined fire-scar records and tree-ring data for Ponderosa Pine forests in the southwest United States.
Earlier research by other scientists has looked at forest fire records spanning the years from 1600 to the mid-1800s — a climate period known as the Little Ice Age — to understand current forest fire behavior. Those studies have found that fires during the Little Ice Age occurred frequently in the grasses and downed needles on the surface of the forest floor, but stayed on the floor and didn’t burn into the canopies.
Critics dispute the relevance of the Little Ice Age, however, saying the climate then was cooler and wetter than the climate now. They say a better comparison is A.D. 800 to 1300, known as the Medieval Warm Period, when the climate was hotter and drier, like today’s.
Scientists who favor that comparison hypothesize that forest fires during the Medieval Warm Period probably were similar to today’s megafires and probably more destructive than during the Little Ice Age.
Tree rings and fire scars provide the evidence for moisture, drought and burn activity
Scientists rely on tree rings not only to calculate a tree’s age, but also to determine wet and dry weather patterns of moisture and drought. Similarly, scientists’ best evidence for fire activity is the scarring on tree rings that dates the occurrence of fires. While tree-ring data for climate are available for long time periods, annual forest fire records don’t yet exist for the Medieval Warm Period.
In response to the need for data, Roos and Swetnam tested the Medieval Warm Period hypothesis by calibrating a statistical model that combined 200 years of Little Ice Age fire-scar data and nearly 1,500 years of climate data derived from existing tree rings. With that they were able to predict what the annual fire activity would have been almost 1,500 years ago.
They discovered that the Medieval Warm Period was no different from the Little Ice Age in terms of what drives frequent low-severity surface fires: year-to-year moisture patterns.
“It’s true that global warming is increasing the magnitude of the droughts we’re facing, but droughts were even more severe during the Medieval Warm Period,” Roos said. “It turns out that what’s driving the frequency of surface fires is having a couple wet years that allow grasses to grow continuously across the forest floor and then a dry year in which they can burn. We found a really strong statistical relationship between two or more wet years followed by a dry year, which produced lots of fires.”
Modeling of tree-ring and fire-scar data can be applied to any locale
The research, “A 1416-year reconstruction of annual, multidecadal, and centennial variability in area burned for ponderosa pine forests of the southern Colorado Plateau region, Southwest USA,” was funded by the International Arid Lands Consortium.
“The best way to look at how fires may have varied — if climate were the only driver — is to do this type of modeling,” Roos said. “Our study is the first in the world to go this far back using this methodology. But this method can be used anyplace for which there is a fire-scar record.”
The study’s tree-ring-derived climate data are from the southern Colorado Plateau, a region that includes the world’s largest continuous stand of Ponderosa Pine stretching from Flagstaff, Ariz., into New Mexico. Large Ponderosa Pine forests have existed in the area for more than 10,000 years.
Fire-scar data for the region go back as far as the 1500s, but are most prevalent during the Little Ice Age period. Fire scientists have analyzed fire-scars from hundreds of trees from more than 100 locations across the Southwest. All fire-scar data are publically available through the International Multiproxy Paleofire Database, maintained by the federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s paleoclimatology program.
Ancient fires were frequent, but didn’t burn the forest canopy
Fire scientists know that in ancient forests, frequent fires swept the forest floor, often sparked by lightning. Many of the fires were small, less than a few dozen acres. Other fires may have been quite large, covering tens of thousands of acres before being extinguished naturally. Fuel for the fires included grass, small trees, brush, bark, pine needles and fallen limbs on the ground.
“The fires cleaned up the understory, kept it very open, and made it resilient to climate changes because even if there was a really severe drought, there weren’t the big explosive fires that burn through the canopy because there were no fuels to take it up there,” Roos said. “The trees had adapted to frequent surface fires, and adult trees didn’t die from massive fire events because the fires burned on the surface and not in the canopy.”
Today’s huge canopy fires are the cumulative result of human activity
The ancient pattern of generally small, frequent fires changed by the late 1800s. The transcontinental railroad had pushed West, bringing farmers, ranchers, cattle and sheep. Those animals grazed the forest floor, consuming the grasses that fueled small fires but leaving small saplings and brush, which then grew up into dense, mature bushes and trees. In addition, the U.S. began to restrict the traditional land use of the region’s Native American communities, including confining them to reservations. This removed another source for frequent surface fires in the forests — burning by Native Americans for horticulture and hunting.
By the early 20th century, the U.S. Forest Service had been established, and fighting fires was a key part of the agency’s mission. Without continuous fuel, fires on the forest floor ceased.
“Many of our modern forests in central Arizona and New Mexico haven’t had a fire of any kind on them in 130 or 140 years,” Roos said. “That’s very different from the records of the ancient forests. The longest they would have gone without fires was 40 or 50 years, and even that length of time would have been exceptional.”
The research reported in The Holocene is the basis for a new four-year, $1.5 million grant from the National Science Foundation in which Roos and Swetnam are co-principal investigators. That project will examine how human activities have changed forests and forest fires over the past 1,000 years of Native American occupation, as well as the influence of droughts during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age in New Mexico’s Jemez Mountains. — Margaret Allen
SMU is a nationally ranked private university in Dallas founded 100 years ago. Today, SMU enrolls nearly 11,000 students who benefit from the academic opportunities and international reach of seven degree-granting schools. For more information see www.smuresearch.com.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Of course studies like this were tailor-made for a blind, bumbling media that will generate headlines that fires are growing worse due to human activity and the takeaway will be that someone has to do something about AGW. The humanity.
I write about forest fires in DSYC:
Fire is another expression of the ever-changing distribution of water. A wet, cool forest will seldom burn, but not a single forest stays wet and cool forever. What is required to generate a large forest fire is a period of relatively abundant precipitation followed by a period of relatively limited precipitation. Or, in other words, normal meteorological variability.
Fire photographs so well that commentators feel especially free to associate it with global warming. In the Californian west, where I am from, there are wet and rainy seasons. This has been true throughout the Holocene climate epoch. Yet, it is a safe bet that TV screens will light up in July, August, and September with this year’s crop of Western fires, and somebody somewhere, watching and listening, will conclude that the brilliant orange and reds were caused by too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the warming that it produced. But have any of the television correspondents studied American fire history or world fire history?
In the 1920s, according to the U.S. Forest Service, fires burned an average of 26 million acres a year. During the 1930s, they burned an average of 39 million acres a year. During the 1940s, the total was 22 million acres a year. During the 1950s, 10 million acres a year. During the 1960s, the total burned was 5 million acres a year. During the 1970s, 4 million acres a year. During the 1980s and ’90s, fires again burned an average of 5 million acres a year. The record for the 2000s shows an annual average of 7 million acres a year. Thus, the overall trend for the past century is overwhelmingly in decline. If the number of acres burned increased next year to the levels of the 1920s and ’30s, what do you suppose the newspaper headlines would read?
Those who care to can find more here.
This is really interesting, but unsurprising. The same pattern can be seen in Australia.
After the dreadful wildfires of 3 years ago in Victoria I have been aghast to see the huge amount of understorey growth, following all the rain they’ve had. It’s all ready to burn again with the next long, hot summer. The most horrifying thing is that there is, once again, a lot of young growth along the roadsides, all ready to allow fire into the tree canopies. These are roads needed for escape. Frightening.
Interesting, but the theory that today’s fires can be more severe because forest (mis)management practices lead to higher fuel density have been around for quite some time. Nice to hear “Little Ice Age” and “Medieval Warm Period” in a discussion of potential affects of climate change.
Did the study examine the introduction of matches and the creation of unkempt national parks?
Forests can handle a wide range of climates, therefore URGENT ACTION IS NEEDED NOW!
Good Gaian logic, terrible human logic.
And as usual their trend-reading is wrong.
Southwest temperatures hit a strong peak in the ’90s but are decidedly trending downward now:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/time-series/index.php?parameter=tmp&month=9&year=2011&filter=12&state=107&div=0
and Southwest precip isn’t doing anything special:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/time-series/index.php?parameter=pcp&month=9&year=2011&filter=12&state=107&div=0
if you think the SW US has a megafire problem, try Australia with its flora dominated by species who actually require fire to reproduce and assist the process by manufacturing flammable oils in their leaves. The removal of the Aboriginal population from the landscape with their management by fire for tens of thousands of years coupled with ecozealots who treat our native landscapes as somthing fixed and attack any attempt to introduce alternative management methods similarly results in wildfires that kill hundreds of people at a time. The death rates are far worse than 100 or 150 years ago despite all the available technology and means of escape.
I was taught about fire-suppression leading to accumulating undergrowth and more damaging fires while at summer camp in the early 1970s in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
“… extreme droughts caused by climate change …. .”
At least they haven’t blamed mann … er … man.
Well, not yet anyway.
Luckily that article only used the word “model” or “Modelling” 5 times. I’ve developed a model that clearly shows the value of an article scales with the inverse of the sum of “model” terms used. It’s the bogosity forcing term.
Let me put in a plug for a book I just read by America’s greatest living historian of fire, Stephen Pyne.
The book is _Year of the Fires: The Story of the Great Fires of 1910_. Pyne’s book doesn’t just provide great narrative, it shows how progressive leaders like Gifford Pinchot used the disasters of 1910 to solidify into policy their ideological aversion to natural fires and their radical commitment to a “zero tolerance” policy for both natural burning and controlled burning. That approach, which contradicted the advice of an older generation of naturalists such as John Wesley Powell, remained the established conventional wisdom until it started to break down three generations later, during the late 1980s and is now in tatters.
I find some rough parallels between the current man-made-dangerous climate change orthodoxy and the 20th century progressive orthodoxy about the role of fire in nature (which Pyne himself mentions once or twice in passing). Both place a heavy emphasis on technocratic control, and the empowerment of an elite expert class whose views are not to be questioned. Doubtless there are big contrasts between the old Pinchotian progressives and the current crop of Malthusian ecologists (the former were not ideologically opposed to resource extraction), for example. But the manipulation of scientific data to support a predetermined view is abundant in both cases.
Thinking about Pyne’s book and the long time period it took before the anti-fire ideology began to be questioned, I have to wonder how long the current anti-CO2 ideology will hang on. Unfortunately I’m somewhat pessimistic about this. As Thomas Kuhn said about scientific paradigms, they normally change via death more than by argument.
http://www.amazon.com/Year-Fires-Story-Great-1910/dp/0878425446/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1337341866&sr=8-1
Smokey Bear, call your office. You’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do! Seriously, fire suppression was a consensus opinion and is equivalent to geo-engineering schemes. It should be taken as a recent object lesson about the unintended consequences that arise when actions are applied to half-understood “problems.”
So 4 or 5 non-GW related reasons for the fires yet somehow still linked to GW? Jeez. There are definately human reasons for these fires: different management styles from the native americans, houses in areas where no one lived 50 years ago (hence didn’t care about the fires), campers, vandals, the previous management style of extinguishing every fire regardless of how remote. Remember fire jumpers? Talk about a crazy as* job.
The SW is naturally dry, that has nothing to do with GW. There are practically zero forest fires in the NE and we have more trees than we had 200 years ago.
Anthony,
The “unprecedented” phrase applies to Swetnam & Roos using fire signatures
in Ponderosa Pines … not necessarily the overall data trends as they reflect
temperature or moisture over the 1,416 year period.
Swetnam & Roos did a similar study using Giant Sequoias in:
http://www.rmtrr.org/data/Swetnametal_2009.pdf
This earlier study is well worth reading, especially their data , graphs and
interpretations of what went on and what it meant in terms or fire signatures
in these huge trees in the American west during the LIA and the MWP.
Their data maps these periods , and similar climate fluctuations in the
American Southwest in a very clear manner.
However, just because the LIA and MWP and other warm/cold periods
seem to show up in tree rings in our Southwest doesn’t these climate phases
happened anywhere else in the world around the same times.
IIRC, the extensive Longleaf pine forests of the Gulf coastal plains typically had surface burns every couple yrs — mostly lightning-caused. Understory fuel never had a chance to build up. This was once one of the richest ecosystems in the world, rivaling tropical rain forests in species diversity.
I’ll call this as BS.
We know what happens in warm temperate zone forests of similar size to California, without people, because we have one here in Western Australia called the Great Southern Woodland (about 1/2 the size of California. Although if you include the scrub forest to the north, comparable in size to California).
Forest fires burn unchecked throughout most summers. Some years fires burn throughout the winter.
In the 1970s one fire burned for 2 years across 30 million acres. About a third of the size of California.
BTW, the fires start from lightning strikes and we can assume they have occurred for a very long time.
I have served in the nsw rual fire brigade for 50 years in the old days we did not have any problem with burning off but in the 80s the greens come and soon stopped all the burns. from that time we have had major fires that took lives and property right across australia and the greens still say they are saving the trees they are wrong a very hot fire kills the trees .you cannot change somebody who has only half a brain . PLEASE you will make a million if you can get a greeny to use at least some of his left side brain or right side it is up to you. God bless Australia because we need all the help we can get
Today’s mega forest fires of the southwestern U.S. are truly unusual and exceptional in the long-term record, suggests a new study that examined hundreds of years of ancient tree ring and fire data from two distinct climate periods.
Conduct a study rather than ask anyone involved in fighting forest fires in the past sixty years.
Some species of pines *require* periodic fires through the area — their cones won’t open to expel the seeds unless they’re scorched.
“If anything, what climate change reminds us is that it’s pretty urgent that we deal with the structural problems in the forests”
==============
If anything, what climate change reminds us is that it’s pretty urgent to convince the government that we can manage everything…..there’s good government money in it…………
Short version:
There was way more carbon soot in the air and on the ground in forests and grasslands prior to industrialization. Because of human impacts, there now is way less.
Wait…doesn’t that contradict a different study?
Smoky Bear should have been left in the woods.
@Bill Tuttle:
I think you will like:
http://www.werc.usgs.gov/OLDsitedata/seki/pdfs/ecology3.pdf
Various California plants with different fire mediated germination strategies. Some depend on heat and scorching, others use smoke…
It is an ecosystem that has evolved to depend on forest fire….
I agree with the folks pointing out the “no burn” for way too long followed by the “no putting out”. Just brain dead. Darned near destroyed Yosemite a few years back. Eventually the public outcry had them control it.
To fix the national forests (i.e. get back to normal) will take a lifetime of controlling modest to small size burns. Nature had a patchwork of different ages so it didn’t all burn at once.
More articles on smoke and fire induced germination:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=smoke+initiated+germination
(Using a search engine that does not track you and does not “bubble you” based on prior searches).
“This removed another source for frequent surface fires in the forests — burning by Native Americans for horticulture and hunting.”
Non-natives also burned the underbrush, for many reasons. Don’t treat it as a native thing.
While it is nice that the MWP is acknowledged in their narrative, I know of no real evidence that global warming is increasing the magnitude or frequency of droughts. How can it? Any warming is accompanied by increased evaporation and subsequent precipitation overall. Some of that moisture must find it’s way to drought areas making drought less severe as demonstrated in the Sahara regions. Yet this claim is repeated numerously through-out the article.
When are these researchers going to give proper examination and testing to their initial assumptions, so that some credibility remains for their study results? Making unsubstantiated assumptions seems to be a requirement for consensus science. GK
More CO2..more growth.. more fuel..more fire?
Since the late 1800’s native grasslands in the SW have been invaded by cheatgrass (BRTE). Originally a Southern European species, it’s hardier, dries more quickly and burns hotter than native species. It’s the major contributor to the change in fire frequency and intensity over the last few hundred years.