Invigorating Prescribed Fire Science Through Improved Reporting Practices

Interest in prescribed fire science has grown over the past few decades due to the increasing application of prescribed fire by managers to mitigate wildfire hazards, restore biodiversity, and improve ecosystem resilience. Numerous ecological disciplines use prescribed fire experiments to provide land managers with evidence-based information to support prescribed fire management. Documenting variation in the context and conditions during prescribed fire experimental treatments is critical for management inference, but inconsistencies in reporting critical experimental details can complicate interpretation. Such details are needed to provide ecological and empirical context for data, facilitate experimental replication, enable meta-analyses, and maximize utility for other scientists and practitioners. To evaluate reporting quality in the recent literature, we reviewed 219 prescribed fire experiments from 16 countries published in 11 refereed journals over the last 5 years. Our results suggest substantial shortcomings in the reporting of critical data that compromise the utility of this research. Few studies had specific information on burning conditions such as fuel moisture (22%), quantitative fuel loads (36%), fire weather (53%), and fire behavior (30%). Further, our analysis revealed that 63% of the studies provided precise coordinates for their study area, while 30% of studies indicated the prescribed fire date. Only 54% of the studies provided descriptions of the ignition characteristics. Given these common deficiencies, we suggest minimum reporting standards for future prescribed fire experiments. These standards could be applied to journal author guidelines, directed to researchers and reviewers by the editor, and promoted in the education of fire ecologists. Establishing reporting standards will increase the quality, applicability, and reproducibility of prescribed fire science, facilitate future research syntheses, and foster actionable science.

“Society-Ready” and “Fire-Ready” Forestry Education in the United States: Interdisciplinary Discussion in Forestry Course Textbooks

Changing environmental and social forestry contexts present new challenges for forestry graduates. In contrast with previous generations, forestry students today must be prepared to handle the impacts of climate change and increasing fire severity and frequency, as well as critical human dimensions, including the need to collaborate with Native American nations. To explore the extent to which social and fire science is taught in forestry programs and how it has changed over time, we conducted a content analysis of prominent forestry course textbooks used in graduate programs in the United States. We found little change between texts published before and after 2000, except for an increase in discussion of climate change. Of the currently used textbooks, we found a significant variation in whether they included discussion of traditional ecological knowledge, prescribed burning, combined economic factors, logging, and whether they recommended prescribed burning and logging. Given that not all programs offer or require courses that specialize in these topics, many forestry students may be missing relevant interdisciplinary social-fire education that is necessary to handle contemporary and changing forestry issues. Study Implications High-severity fires are a pressing concern in the United States and globally. Their frequency and intensity are affected by historical and contemporary land management practices, climate change, and forest use change—factors that are all influenced by social, political, and economic processes. However, our findings, based on an analysis of the contents of prominent textbooks used in US forestry courses, along with other research, show that the connections between fire and socioecological factors are often neglected in forestry higher-education textbooks. This suggests that future forest managers may not be properly prepared to handle changing fire regimes as climate change advances and social, political, and economic forces influence forestry practices. Thus, our research suggests that required forestry curricula course content should be revised to incorporate more coverage of fire science and socioecological factors, particularly traditional ecological knowledge and climate change, to prepare future foresters for the emerging challenges they will face.

Fifty years of wildland fire science in Canada

We celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Canadian Journal of Forest Research by reflecting on the considerable progress accomplished in select areas of Canadian wildfire science over the past half century. Specifically, we discuss key developments and contributions in the creation of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System; the relationships between wildland fire and weather, climate, and climate change; fire ecology; operational decision support; and wildland fire management. We also discuss the evolution of wildland fire management in Banff National Park as a case study. We conclude by discussing some possible directions in future Canadian wildland fire research including the further evaluation of fire severity measurements and effects; the efficacy of fuel management treatments; climate change effects and mitigation; further refinement of models pertaining to fire risk analysis, fire behaviour, and fire weather; and the integration of forest management and ecological restoration with wildfire risk reduction. Throughout the paper we reference many contributions published in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research, which has been at the forefront of international wildland fire science.

The Use of Science in Wildland Fire Management: a Review of Barriers and Facilitators

Purpose of Review Science plays a critical role in natural resource management, and the use of science in decision-making is mandated by several policy initiatives. Other disciplines have documented the challenges associated with applying science to management and possible solutions to overcoming challenges, but the evaluation of science use in wildland fire management is relatively immature. In this paper, we reviewed the available literature that evaluates science use in wildland fire management and common barriers and facilitators to science use in decision-making. Recent Findings We developed a conceptual model that describes the possible uses of science in fire management (perception, planning, forecasting, implementation, assessment, communication, and policy), common barriers to science use (lack of science, uncertainty, funding/capacity, conflict), common facilitators to fire science use (collaboration, trust, boundary organizations, co-production), and factors that can act as facilitators or barriers to science use depending on their presence or absence (awareness, accessibility, relevance). In the context of our conceptual model, we reviewed 67 papers that examined fire science use between 1986 and 2019. Summary Most studies were conducted in the USA in the last 10 years and demonstrated that science is commonly used in fire management and that the maturation of organizations devoted to science translation and communication in the last 10 years has likely facilitated the application of fire science. The evaluation of fire science use, however, is still relatively immature, with studies needed on the use of fire science in countries outside the USA, the use of science in the management of wildfires, and in the crafting of policy related to wildland fire management.