1 / 56

RESTORAION AND REHABILITATION OF WATERSHEDS FOLLOWING WILDFIRES Dan Neary1 and Pete Ffolliott2 1USDA Forest Service, F

INTRODUCTION. PONDEROSA PINE

Sophia
Download Presentation

RESTORAION AND REHABILITATION OF WATERSHEDS FOLLOWING WILDFIRES Dan Neary1 and Pete Ffolliott2 1USDA Forest Service, F

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. RESTORAION AND REHABILITATION OF WATERSHEDS FOLLOWING WILDFIRES Dan Neary1 and Pete Ffolliott2 1USDA Forest Service, Flagstaff, AZ 2University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

    2. INTRODUCTION PONDEROSA PINE & MIXED CONIFERS PINON-JUNIPER, CHAPARRAL, SAVANNAS FIRE ADAPTED ECOSYSTEMS FIRE CESSATION FROM 1880 ONWARDS

    3. INTRODUCTION

    4. Presentation Objectives DISCUSS Current Wildfire Situation Watershed Responses Restoration vs Rehabilitation Rodeo-Chediski Example

    8. FIRE OUT OF BOUNDS

    10. RODEO-CHEDISKI FIRE JUNE 18 – JULY 7, 2002 Landscape Scale Size 183,000 ha High severity Out of Natural Range Phoenix Watershed High Erosion Vegetation Shifts High Costs of Suppression and Restoration

    11. MATRIX OF SEVERITIES

    12. HIGH SEVERITY FIRE

    14. WATERSHED RESPONSES

    16. WILDFIRES & FLOODS Range of response 0 to 2,230 X pre-fire Function of Severity Largest on small streams Many Contributing Factors Most Devastating Post-fire Effect

    17. PEAKFLOW INCREASES MISCELLANEOUS FORESTS

    20. POST-FIRE WATERSHEDS RESTORATION VS REHABILITATION DEFINITION CONFUSION BIG PROBLEMS WHAT RESOURCE? TIME FRAMES (1, 10, 100, etc Years) COST ENVIRONMENTAL HURDLES

    22. WATERSHED RESTORATION DEFINITION: 1. Putting back into near the original form or unimpaired condition. 2. IS THIS REALLY POSSIBLE? OBJECTIVE: Speed the return to pre-fire conditions TIME: 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000 Years?

    23. WATERSHED RESTORATION NATIONAL FIRE PLAN DEFINITION: “Taking passive or active management actions to increase resiliency and improve landscape conditions so fire and other natural processes can fulfill their appropriate ecological roles. TIME: 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000 Years?

    24. WATERSHED RESTORATION RESOURCES: 1. Overstory 2. Understory 3. Forest Floor 4. Soils 5. Biota 6. Hydrologic Function 7. Cultural COMPONENTS: Is everything still there? TIME: 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000 Years?

    25. WATERSHED REHABILITATION DEFINITION: 1. To return to a former capacity or function 2. THIS IS NOT RESTORATION OBJECTIVE: To reduce post-fire damage to function in the short-term TIME: 1-2 Years

    26. WATERSHED REHABILITATION BAER: BURNED AREA EMERGENCY REHABILITATION OBJECTIVES: Stabilize Soil Reduce Erosion Prevent Floods Stabilize Channels Prevent Road & Trail Wash Out Mitigate threats

    27. WATERSHED REHABILITATION BAER: BURNED AREA EMERGENCY REHABILITATION TREATMENTS: Hillslope Channel Road TIME: Immediately post-fire A FEW EXAMPLES PROVIDED

    33. Waugh Creek Treatments Averaged

    34. RODEO-CHEDISKI FIRE STERMER RIDGE STUDY Apache-Sitgreaves NF Black Mesa RD Slopes <10% Little Colorado Basin Established 1972 Ffolliott & Baker 1977 Soils Typic Cryoboralfs Vegetation Pondersa Pine and Gambel Oak Mixed Grass and Forb Understory

    35. STERMER RIDGE WATERSHEDS Size 24 ha WS 3 High Severity WS 4 L – M Severity 1 m H-Flume Gaged Vegetation and Soil Sampling Plots – 30 per Watershed 2 Weather Stations at Original Sites

    39. STERMER RIDGE STREAMFLOW Ephemeral Channels Snowmelt Dominated High and Low Severity Peakflow Out of Natural Range Contributed To Larger Basin Flows Recovery Within 4 Years

    44. STERMER RIDGE WATER REPELLENCY 2002 Strong -Mod 100 % WS 3 50 % WS 4 2005 WS 3 & 4 = 0 % No Slope or Aspect Differences

    45. STERMER RIDGE EROSION FIRST YEAR 60 TO 100 Mg/ha SECOND YEAR 62 TO 79 Mg/ha

    46. CHANNEL SEDIMENT

    47. STERMER RIDGE VEGETATION RECOVERY

    48. STERMER RIDGE LITTER

    50. SUMMARY

    53. POST-WILDFIRE RESTORATION vs REHABILITATION RESTORATION Pieces All There Very Long term Variable Cost Works if You Wait Functions Returned Natural Process Hazards Natural REHABILITATION Pieces Missing Short Term (BAER) Very Expensive Doesn’t Always Work Some Function Returns Human Managed Mitigate Some Hazards

    55. RESTORATION

More Related