thinning

This review synthesizes the scientific literature on fuel treatment economics published since 2013 with a focus on its implications for land managers and policy makers. We review the literature on whether fuel treatments are financially viable for land management agencies at the time of implementation, as well as over the lifespan of fuel treatment effectiveness.

Mechanical forest thinning treatments are implemented across the western United States (US) to improve forest health and reduce hazardous fuels. However, the main challenge in thinning operations is low financial feasibility.

In western North America beginning in the late 19th century, fire suppression and other factors resulted in denseponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests that are now prone to high severity wildfire, insect attack, and rootdiseases. Thinning and prescribed fire are commonly used to remove small trees, fire-intolerant tree species, andshrubs, and to reduce surface and aerial fuels.

In western North America beginning in the late 19th century, fire suppression and other factors resulted in dense ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests that are now prone to high severity wildfire, insect attack, and root diseases. Thinning and prescribed fire are commonly used to remove small trees, fire-intolerant tree species, and shrubs, and to reduce surface and aerial fuels.

Background Fuel treatments are widely used to alter fuels in forested ecosystems to mitigate wildfire behavior and effects. However, few studies have examined long-term ecological effects of interacting fuel treatments (commercial harvests, pre-commercial thinnings, pile and burning, and prescribed fire) and wildfire.

Management in fire-prone ecosystems relies widely upon application of prescribed fire and/or fire-surrogate (e.g., forest thinning) treatments to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem function. The literature suggests fire and mechanical treatments proved more variable in their effects on understory vegetation as compared to their effects on stand structure.

Fuel treatment implementation in dry forest types throughout the western United States is likely to increase in pace and scale in response to increasing incidence of large wildfires.

Determining appropriate actions to create or maintain landscapes resilient to climate change is challenging because of uncertainty associated with potential effects of climate change and their interactions with land management.

Fuel-reduction treatments are used extensively to reduce wildfire risk and restore forest diversity and function. In the near future, increasing regulation of carbon (C) emissions may force forest managers to balance the use of fuel treatments for reducing wildfire risk against an alternative goal of C sequestration.

As a fuel, wood has been with us since humans tamed fire. So what’s the big deal? Why the renewed interest in wood as a source of energy? If we imagine a way to power Oregon that is less dependent on fossil fuels, that is built instead on renewable and homegrown sources of energy, then woody fuel should be a significant part of the picture.