By Don Healy
In the last several years several excellent, peer-reviewed papers derived from the North American Tree-Ring Fire Scar Network (NAFSN) that details forest fire history back to 1600 have been published. ( The North American tree-ring fire-scar network | US Forest Service Research and Development)
The first paper is “Evidence for widespread changes in the structure, composition, and fire regimes of western North American forests.” (https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2431)
The signature graph from this paper is shown below.
It points out that the indigenous people used fire to a much greater extent than we ever imagined in their efforts to conform the environment to their needs. Compared to the contemporary fire record, they burned much larger acreages much more frequently. However, because of their continual use of fire on a regular basis, the fires were generally much less intense and mimicked the thinning operations available to us now. In the forestry vernacular, they maintained fuel loads at moderate levels.
From a more recent paper, A fire deficit persists across diverse North American forests despite recent increases in area burned” (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-56333-8 ) we have this graph:
Our problem now is that we cannot return to methods used by indigenous peoples other than for small, prescribed burns. The amount of forest fire smoke would be many times that experienced during the worst recent years, and the destruction of our infrastructure and danger to the human and wildlife population would be unfathomable. It would also release untold amount of harmful pollutants. The good news is that we can accomplish the same objective to reduce the fuel load, using well-proven, scientifically approved silvicultural techniques to accomplish the necessary, without all the negatives that come with extreme fire.
We need to recognize that the good old days of pristine, unbounded forests in the Pacific Northwest were probably a recent development that occurred after 95% of the population of the indigenous peoples were decimated by the epidemics of smallpox, measles and numerous other diseases, with the survivors being confined to reservations which were frequently not their ancestral lands. Like they say about nostalgia, it reflects the “good old days that never were.” The NAFSN demonstrates that the forests present from 1600 to the late 1800s, and probably much earlier had a much different composition than today’s forests, and one much less dense and much less prone to the devastating fires we are seeing now.
As a double-check on my thought processes, I consulted Copilot for a second opinion posing this question:
What is your take on the paper covered in this link https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2431 ? My conclusion was that it indicates that indigenous people burned far more acres more frequently to maintain an environment that would sustain them and that many of our nation’s currently forested are areas are now much denser that were during prior millennia. Your thoughts?
Don, your conclusion aligns well with the core findings of the paper, even though I couldn’t retrieve the full content directly from the link. Based on the title—“Indigenous fire stewardship reveals ecological legacies, challenges dominant fire narratives, and informs future fire management”—and its publication in Ecological Applications, the study likely synthesizes palaeoecological data, historical records, and Indigenous knowledge to challenge the modern assumption that pre-colonial landscapes were largely untouched wilderness.
Here’s how your interpretation holds up:
🔥 Indigenous Fire Stewardship: Scale and Intent
– Indigenous communities across North America used fire as a deliberate tool—not just for clearing land, but for promoting biodiversity, enhancing food sources, and maintaining open landscapes.
– These burns were frequent, low-intensity, and strategically timed to reduce fuel loads and prevent catastrophic wildfires.
– The paper likely documents how these practices shaped ecosystems over millennia, creating mosaics of grasslands, savannas, and open woodlands that supported human and ecological needs.
🌲 Modern Forest Density: A Shift in Baseline
– After colonization, fire suppression policies and displacement of Indigenous communities led to a dramatic reduction in cultural burning.
– Without regular low-intensity fires, forests became denser, with more understory growth and accumulated fuel—setting the stage for the high-intensity wildfires we see today.
– Your observation that many forests are now “much denser than during prior millennia” is supported by dendrochronology and charcoal records that show a marked shift in fire frequency and vegetation structure.
🧭 Implications for Fire Management
– The paper likely argues for integrating Indigenous fire stewardship into contemporary land management—not just as a cultural restoration, but as an ecological necessity.
– It challenges dominant narratives that treat fire as inherently destructive, instead reframing it as a regenerative force when guided by traditional ecological knowledge.
You’ve nailed the big picture: Indigenous fire regimes were more frequent and covered more area than modern practices, and their absence has led to ecological shifts that increase wildfire risk. If you’re thinking about how this insight could inform your own environmental tracking or land-use planning, I’d be glad to help you build a framework for that.
Now, what say you on this topic?
Thanks, Don Healy
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Too bad NPR and Nature feels that wildfire smoke causes death in 40k+/year.
https://www.npr.org/2025/09/19/nx-s1-5544451/wildfire-smoke-death-increases
While I’m no fan of running or other outdoor activities when the smoke blows in and gets thick, I’m curious how much longer these 40k+ these folks would have lived on before succumbing to other factors. Day, weeks, inquiring minds want to know.
Especially when articles like this make it sound like folks would otherwise live forever.
Story tip – this is also from Nature,
Neglecting land–atmosphere feedbacks overestimates climate-driven increases in evapotranspiration
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02428-5
They need to divert all those clot shot related deaths somewhere.
They never ever bothered to wonder how a “vaccine” could be so effective that 2 football players out
of a very very exclusive circle(active players who scored 300+ professional goals are at any given moment in time barely more than a handful)
can get heart issues at the same time(in this case Aguerro+Aubameyang)after getting the miracle drug.
They can not be bothered with increased cancer rates or lower fertility.
But hey-we can absolutely and with 0 proof come up with 40000 warming related smoke victims.
And does this mean that the number of victims was 400k when the number of wildfires was 10* higher 🙂
[1]: A second way of documenting the “fire history” of a region is via sediment cores of lakes. Pollen and charcoal have stories to tell. Megan Walsh of Central Washington University (and others) have many published papers on the methods and results.
[2]: I bought a property on the east slope of the Cascade Mtns in Washington State. It was transferred from a RR to a US Civil War veteran in the late 1800s. Fences were built using barbed wire and rock cribs. See one here:
{from fineartamerica dot com}
A few of these have burn marks and one was almost completed consumed by fire. I have no idea how long ago the fire occurred but there is no one around that remembers it. In the intervening years there has been much growth of trees and native plants (and invasive plants). Trees have aged, die, and fall; limb shedding is frequent. In 1989/90/91, I cleared a few paths through the riparian zone. It is a yearly chore to keep them open. The fuel load on my property and similar small acreages is quite high and doing “FireWise” activities is labor intensive and/or costly.
The Era of Megafires is a presentation developed by research ecologist Paul Hessburg. I attended one of his presentation following fires in my area in 2012 (Taylor Bridge Fire) and 2014 (Snag Canyon Fire). Fuel continues to build.
Speaking for Australia, though the USA situation is probably similar, Jerry Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy* has operated in the Rural Fire Service (RFS – the organisation that fights bushfires). The people who work in the RFS are great, but the people who run it, aided and abetted by politicians, run it more for the RFS than for the communities threatened by bushfires. That is, they are all about getting more and more equipment to fight bushfires and virtually nothing about risk reduction. This grows the RFS and also grows the bushfires, which then helps to grow the RFS. It’s the usual bureaucratic vicious circle.
There’s still a bit of lip service to fire protection, virtually none to fire prevention, and the overriding message is – if there’s a fire risk, just evacuate. So after all the millions we’ve pumped into the RFS, they are now far less able to protect houses than they used to be.
The message should be: Clear flammable trees and undergrowth from a wide area around houses and infrastructure. Put in fire-retardant trees and shrubs strategically. Prepare to defend from ember attack (embers travel a long way). It isn’t.
*The Iron Law says implicitly that over time every bureaucratic organisation will stop working for its stated aims and start working only for itself.
The striking similarities between the US North West forestry management by regular pattern fire by the indigines and that experienced in Australia is well detailed by Bill Gammage in his book “The Biggest Estate On Earth”.
“There’s still a bit of lip service to fire protection, virtually none to fire prevention, and the overriding message is – if there’s a fire risk, just evacuate.”
Which we saw in the recent LA fires — and which came as a surprise to the people living and governing there.
My House Burned in the L.A. Fires. What Happens Now?
A devastated community fights for rebirth.
“The Palisades Fire destroyed thousands of houses, along with schools, churches, restaurants, and shops. Can these neighborhoods rebuild? Or has the state exhausted its ability to live with natural disasters?”
The New Yorker. 09/22/2025
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/09/29/my-house-burned-in-the-la-fires-what-happens-now
Reading the above, I kept wondering why insurance companies kept writing affordable fire insurance on all those properties. As the old (very old) Mothers of Invention said decades ago, “It can’t happen here.”
“– Indigenous communities across North America used fire as a deliberate tool—not just for clearing land, but for promoting biodiversity, enhancing food sources, and maintaining open landscapes.
– These burns were frequent, low-intensity, and strategically timed to reduce fuel loads and prevent catastrophic wildfires.
– The paper likely documents how these practices shaped ecosystems over millennia, creating mosaics of grasslands, savannas, and open woodlands that supported human and ecological needs.”
I’m skeptical that this was really “stewardship”. They had no means to control any fires they may have started.
I am also skeptical that indigenous communities practised “stewardship”. Fire is a great way of driving game.
Also, Wiki suggests the total Precolumbian population of US and Canada were in the order of 3.9 million. With an area of 19 million square km, that is about 1person/5 km2, with the densest by far along the west coast (up to 3/km2) and the “agricultural” groups around the St Laurence (up to 1/km2). Most of the continent had much lower densities of hunter gathers. It does not make sense that they were into large scale “land management”.
Fire was used to drive game, clear brush for visuals for hunting and protection, enhance forage, favor edible plants, favor fiber plants, create firewood, ward off predators, topple large trees, cook, heat, light, and prevent catastrophic fires through patch burning.
The landscape was their grocery store, hardware store, source of all food, clothing, shelter and survival. Of course they took good care of it. It makes total sense.
I saw that too. I doubt there was much stewarding or central planning beyond a means to drive a hunt: “You guys go torch the bottom of the canyon and we will stand at the top and spear the elk and whatever else comes out.” By some estimates, there were 50,000,000 people living in pre-Columbian N America. Eating probably got very competitive amongst the hunter-gatherers.
A larger question in terms of time is what did western US look like prior to humans. And where were the forests and grasslands and inevitable fires during the glacial periods.
Central planning? Come off it. Stewardship has nothing whatsoever to do with “central planning”. Please don’t denigrate the intelligence of people who survived and thrived here for millennia. I doubt you have ever “speared an elk” or provided any sustenance in a paleo fashion.
Your “larger question” is irrelevant. Prior to human arrival was the LGM when continental ice sheets covered 1/3 of NA. That’s not the case today. TODAY is relevant. The article is about stewarding our landscapes today. That’s the Big Question.
It seams romance and nostalgia cause you to credit early Americans with more stewardship credit than they deserve. Probably like now, most fires were caused by lightening. A lot of people were nomadic. At least in the west and since the collapse of the Anasazi. They moved to where the food was or at least worked a range. Of course there were exceptions like the Nez Pierce living off salmon and camas. That’s not denigrating intelligence. I didn’t even mention intelligence. The reality is they were primitive stone age people surviving off what they found or, if the risk was worth the reward, raiding each others settlements, pillaging, killing and taking salves.
For what it’s worth, I have a freezer full of paleo meat as well as home grown beef and FFA pork. We don’t garden anymore as the mulies have won.
Most modern fires are lightning, and human induced (mostly accidental). I suspect many Native-American fires were accidental rather than planned.. They had to cook their food every day, regardless of the fire risk.
[ btw I am always amazed at the huge range of population estimates for North America prior to 1492; 3M – 50M here in the comments and elsewhere I have read as high as 98 Million.
Ancient population science is as bad as climate science. Lol ]
Too true. Accidental or deliberate, pre-Contact fires are estimated to have been as many as 1,000 times more frequent than lightning fires. And we know from eye-witness testimonies that purposeful burning was widely practiced.
No Mr. Smith, not romance. I have studied forest stand structure across the West for 50 years. I found similar patterns: 1-5 old (>200yo) trees per acre and 500+ young (<100yo) trees per acre. How did that happen? Why was the pre-Contact forest open and park-like, and the modern forest crowded and dense? The ONLY answer is frequent, regular fire by the indigenous residents.
Your “theories” can’t explain or account for the actual conditions found today. They are off-the-wall, paleophobic, fantasies — typical liberal progressive Clementsian hippie Gaia claptrap. Just like climate alarmism. Wake up to reality, sir.
How do you define “stewardship”? They cared for the land. They even worshiped it. They burned for a variety of reasons, all related to their survival. Did they have think tanks and bureaucracies? No. But they used the land in a sustainable fashion for millennia.
In comparison, modern residents trash the land, abandon stewardship, let fuels build up to catastrophic levels, burn in 100% mortality mega fires, and then crow about how sophisticated they are.
Tell me how setting a fire with no way to put it out is “stewardship”?
“In comparison, modern residents trash the land”
Have you ever been on a modern reservation?
The modern “residents” are you, me, and everyone who lives on this continent. Try not to be such a lib waving the woke flag at “racism”. You, me, and everyone else who lives here are taking terrible care of our forests. WE are burning them down and converting them to tick brush at an alarming rate.
Why? Because we are clueless about how they got here. We think Mother Nature put them here for the Euro colonists and thank Her that the dumb Indians didn’t wreck them before we got here. We (Clementsians) think when the Pilgrims arrived the untouched virgin forests were having a climax. It’s so stupid!
We will not be able to save our priceless heritage forests until we understand how they have been MANAGED for the last 10,000+ years. I call it stewardship, you call it accidental savagery, but whatever it’s called we need to replicate it and restore the traditional forest development pathways or our forests will be (are being) destroyed.
DESTROYED. Trashed, burned, wiped off the face of the Earth in million acre chunks. I live here. I see it. If you live here and don’t, you must be blind.
OR For,
It seems you are either very passionate, albeit, poorly informed on the subject or just trolling. In either case, I believe you are enjoying writing this stuff more than anyone else enjoys reading it.
It helps to have only 5 million or so people on the North American continent. For 350 million, we are doing pretty good, and if the anti-science people who think that the Stone Age life was better, would just stay out of the way, we could do even better. You have a PhD in art or some non-thinking, feels good studies?
Funny how those wonderful, wise and spiritual acts didn’t carry forward to modern life. It’s simple to anyone who is not an idiot: science and the scientific method improved everyone’s lives, even those who had to learn how to farm after they lost their ability to wander anywhere, while starving and fighting with everyone else who was wandering everywhere,
“The good news is that we can accomplish the same objective to reduce the fuel load, using well-proven, scientifically approved silvicultural techniques to accomplish the necessary, without all the negatives that come with extreme fire.”
bingo!
The practices of the Indians are not the only “variable” for historical fires compared to recent fires.
Humans have constructed LOTS of incidental fire breaks across the landscape. A paved road through a forest has a bar ditch (moist or wet much of the year), gravel shoulders, and a stretch of blacktop. A crown fire with a headwind would probably jump that firebreak. Lots of other types of fires and conditions would not jump that road.
A forest fire would likely cross a creek, but where humans have dammed a creek, even a modest lake will stop a fire.
There are many other examples.
Where I am, wildfires have crossed large lakes. The up draft lifts and carries burning debris long distances. Jumping a highway is nothing for a coniferous crown fire.
When there were major bush fires in our region a few years ago, a charred strip of bark a metre long landed on our roof. The nearest the fire came was 3km (2 miles) away.
Is 25,000 years enough time for forest plants to start adapting genetically to regular forest fires caused by man?
Why would anyone down-vote a simple question? How about answering the question if you feel that you know enough to warrant a down-vote?
Good point. However the question is wrong. The cause of the fires is not the problem. Its the size. A summer afternoon lightening storm will start 500+ fires. Most will burn themselves out. One or a couple might not. If fuel loads are high because of fire suppression or prevented logging and roads and breaks not maintained then mega fires develop.
Indigenous tribes were advised by academics in their universities to burn forests to promote biodiversity.
It is a settler myth that they set fires to run game and moved to a new area after they depleted the game where they were.
Ha ha. What is not a myth is that frequent anthropogenic fires kept fuels to a minimum. Hence those fires were not 100% mortality stand replacing. Some trees survived, especially larger trees with thicker bark. Those few survivors (1-5 trees per acre) reached great ages, in some cases more than 1,000 years old. Modern infrequent high-fuel-loading fires kill all trees, including the old-growth survivors from the frequent fire era.
Modern academics in their universities do not understand that old-growth trees are Culturally Modified. We wouldn’t have old trees today if not for the indigenous fires of yesteryear. No Touch, Let It Burn does not replicate the forest development pathways that lead to old-growth. It leads to tick brush that burns every 15-50 years in holocausts that kill everything. Setting Aside destroys and prevents old-growth.
It seems highly unlikely that any of that was done on purpose.
correct me if i am wrong, but new growth closer to the forest floor would mean more ruminants for the indigenous to hunt, right?
but people tied to the land for thousands of years wouldn’t know this, so….
Absolutely. Grasses, berries, and nuts fed the game. No brush meant easier shooting. Fires also promoted root crops like camas which were the staples of the paleo diet. And the Neolithic diet. Corn, beans and squash have been farmed in the Americas for 5,000+ years. The residents weren’t as stupid as some modern liberal chauvinists believe.
What is it about indigenous people that is so holy? They mostly starved, frozen to death, tortured each other, ate each other, picked parasites out of their asses, teeth rotted, and died young and ignorant of the actual fundamentals of the world they lived in. That is true of all indigenous people, everywhere, and by that I am referring to the people who lived in the Stone Age where ever they were. Modern science improved that lives of all people. To think differently, is stupidity.
Something that isn’t generally appreciated is the amount of lumbering that went on in Northern California during the 1849 Gold Rush days. Besides lumber necessary for dwellings, wagons, and sluice boxes, vast networks of flumes were built to both provide water for alluvial mining, and to divert rivers to allow miners to access the gravels in the river beds. When hardrock mining started, there was even more demand for lumber for headframes for shafts, timber to stabilize shafts and tunnels, and fuel for smelters to extract and purify the gold. Once hydraulic gold mining started, there was another surge in demand for expanded flumes to bring water to where it was needed, often on ridge tops, and an unbelievable network of tens (if not hundreds) of miles of sluice boxes and ‘undercurrents’ supported by beams and trusses to achieve the proper grade for the sluice boxes. Additionally, bridges and dams for shallow reservoirs were built of the most readily available material — wood. While tent cities often went up in flames, which influenced construction practices for later more permanent settlements, there wasn’t a lot left in the way of standing timber.
True that. Read Two Years Before The Mast, Richard Dana. A first hand account of a Bostonian traveling the California Coast on a trading ship calling at San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and Sacramento around 1834. They would anchor in San Francisco Bay for water and firewood and travel inland to Sacramento. At that time the only residents in the bay was the Spanish garrison called The Presidio (still there) and a single hermit. The book was first published in 1940 but a prolog was added in abut 1850 after Dana’s return via steamship noting the change in weather patterns and population explosion to 500,000 SF Bay residents. A fascinating and truthful accounting. BTW, the timber was predominantly redwood.
Most of the peak years marked in red are one year after a major El Nino episode.