Prescribed burning may be conducted at times of the year when fires were infrequent historically, leading to concerns about potential adverse effects on vegetation and wildlife. Historical and prescribed fire regimes for different regions in the continental United States were compared and literature on season of prescribed burning synthesized. In regions and vegetation types where considerable differences in fuel consumption exist among burning seasons, the effects of prescribed fire season appears, for many ecological variables, to be driven more by fire-intensity differences among seasons than by phenology or growth stage of organisms at the time of fire. Where fuel consumption differs little among burning seasons, the effect of phenology or growth stage of organisms is often more apparent, presumably because it is not overwhelmed by fire-intensity differences. Most species in ecosystems that evolved with fire appear to be resilient to one or few out-of-season prescribed burn(s). However, a variable fire regime including prescribed burns at different times of the year may alleviate the potential for undesired changes and maximize biodiversity.

/pdf/ecological-effects-of-prescribed-fire-season-a-literature-34zmswgqj4.pdf

Ecological Effects of Prescribed Fire Season: A Literature Review and Synthesis for Managers

http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/ja/ja_greenberg029.pdf

Short-term response of reptiles and amphibians to prescribed fire and mechanical fuel reduction in a southern Appalachian upland hardwood forest

Fire is being prescribed and used increasingly to promote ecosystem restoration (e.g., oak woodlands and savannas) and to manage wildlife habitat in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachian regions, USA. However, questions persist as to how fire affects hardwood forest communities and associated wildlife, and how fire should be used to achieve management goals. We provide an up-to-date review of fire effects on various wildlife species and their habitat in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians. Documented direct effects (i.e., mortality) on wildlife are rare. Indirect effects (i.e., changes in habitat quality) are influenced greatly by light availability, fire frequency, and fire intensity. Unless fire intensity is great enough to kill a portion of the overstory, burning in closed-canopy forests has provided little benefit for most wildlife species in the region because it doesn’t result in enough sunlight penetration to elicit understory response. Canopy reduction through silvicultural treatment has enabled managers to use fire more effectively. Fire intensity must be kept low in hardwoods to limit damage to many species of overstory trees. However, wounding or killing trees with fire benefits many wildlife species by allowing increased sunlight to stimulate understory response, snag and subsequent cavity creation, and additions of large coarse woody debris. In general, a fire-return interval of 2 yr to 7 yr benefits a wide variety of wildlife species by providing a diverse structure in the understory; increasing browse, forage, and soft mast; and creating snags and cavities. Historically, dormant-season fire was most prevalent in these regions, and it still is when most prescribed fire is implemented in hardwood systems as burn-days are relatively few in the growing season of May through August because of shading from leaf cover and high fuel moisture. Late growing-season burning increases the window for burning, and better control on woody composition is possible. Early growing-season fire may pose increased risk for some species, especially herpetofauna recently emerged from winter hibernacula (April) or forest songbirds that nest in the understory (May to June). However, negative population-level effects are unlikely unless the burned area is relatively large and early growing-season fire is used continually. We did not find evidence that fire is leading to population declines for any species, including Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed species (e.g., Indiana bat [Myotis sodalis Mill. Allen] or northern long-eared bat [M. septentrionalis Trouess.]). Instead, data indicate that fire can enhance habitat for bats by increasing suitability of foraging and day-roost sites. Similarly, concern over burning and displacement of woodland salamanders (Plethodontidae), another taxa of heightened conservation concern, is alleviated when fire is prescribed along ecologically appropriate aspect and slope gradients and not forced into mesic, high site index environments where salamanders are most common. Because topography across the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians is diverse, we contend that applying fire on positions best suited for burning is an effective approach to increase regional landscape heterogeneity and biological diversity. Herein, we offer prescriptive concepts for burning for various wildlife species and guilds in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians.

/pdf/fire-effects-on-wildlife-in-the-central-hardwoods-and-2uujrfntu1.pdf

Fire Effects on Wildlife in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachian Regions, USA

Recent use of prescribed fire and fire surrogates to reduce fuel hazards has spurred interest in their effects on wildlife. Studies of fire in the southern Appalachian Mountains (USA) have documented few effects on reptiles and amphibians. However, these studies were conducted after only one fire and for only a short time (1-3 yr) after the fire. From mid-May to mid-August 2006 and 2007, we used drift fences with pitfall and funnel traps to capture reptiles and amphibians in a control and 3 replicated fuel-reduction treatments: 1) twice-burned (2003 and 2006), 2) mechanical understory cut (2002), and 3) mechanical understory cut (2002) followed by 2 burns (2003 and 2006). We captured fewer salamanders in mechanical + twice-burned treatment areas than in twice-burned and control treatment areas, but we captured more lizards in mechanical + twice-burned treatment areas than in other treatment areas. Higher lizard captures in mechanical + twice-burned treatment areas likely was related to increased ground temperatures and greater thermoregulatory opportunities. Higher and more variable ground temperatures and faster drying of remaining litter and duff may have led to fewer salamander captures in mechanical + twice-burned treatment areas. Our longer term results, after 2 prescribed burns, differ from shorter term results. After one prescribed burn at the same site, eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus) captures were greater in mechanical + burn treatment areas but salamander captures did not differ among treatment areas. Our results indicate that multiple ( L 2) fuel-reduction treatments that decrease canopy cover may benefit lizards but negatively affect salamanders.

/pdf/response-of-reptiles-and-amphibians-to-repeated-fuel-juaccomjb0.pdf

Response of Reptiles and Amphibians to Repeated Fuel Reduction Treatments

https://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/ja/ja_greenberg027.pdf

Response of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) to fire and fire surrogate fuel reduction treatments in a southern Appalachian hardwood forest

As part of a larger study examining the role of prescribed fire in regenerating upland oaks (Quercus spp.), seasonal prescribed burns (winter, spring, summer, and unburned control) were applied to first-stage shelterwood-harvested stands on Horsepen Wildlife Management Area in the Virginia Piedmont in 1995. Because fire impacts are poorly documented for herpetofaunal communities, we surveyed these stands in 1996 capturing 133 individuals of ten species during over 12,720 pitfall trapnights. We found no significant differences in relative abundance of Eastern Red-backed Salamanders (Plethodon cinereus) (P = 0.26), American Toads (Bufo americanus (P = 0.93), or all amphibians combined (P = 0.25) among unburned shelterwood stands and those treated with winter, spring, or summer burns. Three species of reptiles (Northern Fence Lizard [Sceloporus undulatus], Ground Skink [Scincella lateralis], and Southeastern Five-lined Skink [Eumeces inexpectatus]) combined were captured more frequently in burned versus unburned stands (P = 0.02). Based on a stepwise multiple regression model, Eastern Red-backed Salamander captures were more strongly influenced by landscape variables (P = 0.0320), including distance to permanent water and mesic (i.e., eastern-northern) aspects, than by fire treatments (P = 0.26). Similar landscape models were not significant (P < 0.05) for toads or reptiles. Based on these results, prescribed fire may not be detrimental to herpetofaunal communities in oak dominated forests in the Virginia Piedmont.

/pdf/prescribed-fire-impacts-to-amphibians-and-reptiles-in-4lmq4r68u7.pdf

Prescribed Fire Impacts to Amphibians and Reptiles in Shelterwood-harvested Oak-dominated Forests

Successful regeneration of oaks on better sites (SI50� 60) has proven difficult in recent decades due to competition from faster growing species and well-established advanced regeneration from more shade-tolerant species. The suppression of fire is thought to have played a critical role in allowing this largely fire-intolerant competition to dominate many upland hardwood forests at the expense of oaks. As part of a larger study examining the role of prescribed fire in regenerating upland oaks, seasonal pre- scribed burns were applied to first-stage shelterwood harvested stands on Horsepen WMA in the Virginia Piedmont in 1995. We surveyed small mammal communities in these stands to assess the impact of such fires on this component of the fauna. Over a combined 34,000 snap-trap and pitfall trapnights, we found no significant differences in relative abundance of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus), southeastern shrews (Sorex longirostris) pygmy shrews (Sorex hoyi) or southern short-tailed shrews (Blarina carolinensis) among unburned shelterwood stands and those treated with winter, spring, or summer burns. Based on our results, prescribed burning in these shelterwood stands is not adversely impacting small mammals.

David J. Sausville

Papers

Prescribed Fire Impacts to Amphibians and Reptiles in Shelterwood-harvested Oak-dominated Forests

Fire Impacts to Small Mammals in Piedmont Oak-shelterwoods