From SWANSEA UNIVERSITY: Wildfire — it’s not spreading like wildfire
Global wildfire: Misconceptions about trends and impacts revealed in new research
CREDIT Dr Cristina Santin, Swansea University
Prof. Stefan Doerr and Dr Cristina Santin from Swansea University’s College of Science carried out detailed analysis of global and regional data on fire occurrence, severity and its impacts on society.
Their research, published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, looked at charcoal records in sediments and isotope-ratio records in ice cores, to build up a picture of wildfire in the past.
In contrast to what is widely portrayed in the literature and media reports, they found that:
- global area burned has seen an overall slight decline over past decades, despite some notable regional increases. Currently, around 4% of the global land surface is affected by vegetation fires each year.
- there is increasing evidence that there is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago.
- direct fatalities from fire and economic losses also show no clear trends over the past three decades.
The researchers conclude:
“The data available to date do not support a general increase in area burned or in fire severity for many regions of the world. Indeed there is increasing evidence that there is overall less fire in the landscape today than there has been centuries ago, although the magnitude of this reduction still needs to be examined in more detail.”
Notwithstanding the serious impacts on society that emerge when fires occur close to populated areas, as exemplified so dramatically by the un-seasonally early wildfires in Canada this spring that led to the successful evacuation of an entire town of 80,000 inhabitants, the researchers find that the risk of direct death from fire for the population as a whole is relatively low compared with other natural hazards.
Global deaths 1901-2014
- wildfire 3,753
- earthquakes 2.5 million
- floods 7 million
The researchers, however, also warn about the serious implications of climate change, land use changes and increasing population density in the so called wildland-urban interface. For instance, climate change has already led to a lengthening of the fire season in parts of North America and is likely to increase fire occurrence and severity in many regions of the globe including the UK.
They note:
“The warming climate, which is predicted to result in more severe fire weather in many regions of the globe in this century, will probably contribute further to both perceived and actual risks to lives, health and infrastructure. Therefore the need for human societies to coexist with fire will continue, and may increase in the future.”
Prof. Stefan Doerr of Swansea University, who is also the Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Wildland Fire, explained:
“Large scale land use changes are increasingly exposing non-fire adapted landscapes such as tropical peatlands to serious damage by fire”.
Dr Cristina Santin, a biologist at Swansea University, whose research also focuses on the impact of fires on the carbon cycle, added:
“Fire is a fundamental natural ecological agent in many of our ecosystems and only a ‘problem’ where we choose to inhabit these fire-prone regions or when we humans introduce it to non-fire-adapted ecosystems”.
In the synthesis the experts highlight the often fundamental, complex and inevitable role that fire has in both ‘natural’ and ‘man-made’ environments. They argue that the ‘wildfire problem’ is essentially more a social than a natural one and that we need to move towards a more sustainable co-existence with fire. This requires a balanced and informed understanding of the realities of wildfire occurrence and its effects.
###
- “Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus realities in a changing world”: published by the Royal Society. Abstract.
- This innovative research paper was produced following a Royal Society discussion meeting, held in September, and was published as part of a volume exploring both the natural and human aspects of fire in the prestigious scientific journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B earlier this week (May 23).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“global area burned has seen an overall slight decline over past decades, despite some notable regional increases”
Ironically, both could be due to wildfire suppression.
I think of forest fires as a subset of wildfires. So I am not sure deebodk is talking about. The worst wildfire in recent years in the Columbia Basin started after a car accident on a wildlife preserve. There are no forest and most trees survive because of irrigation. Rather than put the fire out quickly with airborne fire suppression, state agencies debated if was allowed. Within an hour the fire was out of control and raged for three days.
Last year I was enjoying a morning sail and noticed a lot of smoke blowing my way. It was apparent that firefighters were trying stop the fire at a canyon where a farm house and dirt road provide a place to fight it. The wind shifted and the fire got around them. The line of defence was the road along the Columbia River. At the yacht club, we were given a choice of evacuating or staying put at our own risk. If the fire jumped the road, it would be too dangerous to fight because of heavy fuel loading on land that we do not control. If you have ever seen a marina burn, once one boat goes up in flames, there rest follows.
The problem with this study is that the global database used is only about 1 and a half decades long, and starts well after the big jump up in large fire activity. Given the very high inter annual variability of wildfire data, it would be extremely difficult for them to detect any statistically significant trends. In other words, the study is not capable of detecting the ongoing changes. In addition, they are not doing an analysis that breaks out the fire data by ecosystem type and prevailing ignition source. That means that they are mixing together data for ecosystems that are highly sensitive to climate change with ones that are not, then looking at the aggregate for signs of significant trends over a period that is too short to reveal anything. It may be comforting to have a study like this that seems to reassure that there is no significant change in fire, but it is not an accurate guide to what is happening.
“It really is sad the way trolls assume that anything they don’t want to hear must be false.”
Just as I expected, MarkW reads something on the internet, makes a wild leap of logic, followed by irrational assumptions. MarkW makes a statement of a fact with no basis in facts.
As indicated by my 1:11 am post, I have experience with a narrow aspect of wildfires related to semi-arid North American. Fires like the one at Yellowstone is an example of a problem that has nothing to do with AGW.
I wonder what the granularity of the data was. Many forest fires are started by lightning, some will burn out on their own, others get extinguished quickly by humans.
Charcoal records are selective – only valid where researchers could look for charcoal?