In a long-term study at the Blodgett Forest Research Station in the Sierra Nevada, we’ve found some thrilling results. In particular, prescribed burning increases carbon storage by a lot in the big, fire-resistant trees. The research presented in this study, which began back in 2000, provides important guidance to California’s policymakers and land managers. Specifically, the plan puts emphasis on addressing wildfire risks and reaching net zero carbon pollution by 2045.
University of California, Berkeley, graduate student Yihong Zhu, the first author on the study, studied the multiple carbon pools in this complex forest ecosystem. They measured everything from rotting pine needles to the trunks of the largest trees. This new research indicates that prescribed burning treatments do a good job of protecting large trees. These treatments enhance the long-term productivity of forest stands.
John Battles, a professor of forest ecology at UC Berkeley and co-author of the study. He stressed the need to get these treatments into practice. He stated, “We’ve got to get these treatments out there.” The research revealed that those plots treated with three prescribed burning treatments showed a marked improvement in net productivity.
Scott Stephens, another Berkeley professor involved in the research, noted that previous assumptions about forest management strategies were challenged through their findings. “We’ve always wondered, if we could restore these ecosystems to a more functional state—lower density and more frequent fire—do we eventually see a bonus? Do we get that golden nugget? And in this work, we were able to actually measure it,” he said.
The research found that the most effective mix for lowering wildfire hazards overall was pairing prescribed burning with mechanical thinning. Poor or erroneous management practices can easily lead to considerable reductions in total carbon storage. Yet, they produce a “stable carbon” buffer that is more protected from carbon losses due to wildfire or pathogen mortality. As Battles explained, “We found that, with some management, you may lower the total carbon storage of a forest, but you make it safer from loss from wildfires or pathogen outbreaks.”
This two-decade-long experiment produced valuable results. These discoveries will lead communities to better inform their decisions regarding the management of urban forests. For example, the researchers noticed consistent effects across tree size and species. Battles explained their work as “exactly like a really big accounting project,” only where “instead of money we’re counting carbon.”
These results from our study have been recently published in a paper with DOI 10.1002/eap.70111. This represents a significant step toward addressing critical challenges in the fields of forest ecology and fire science. The lessons learned from this innovative research will help inform better forestry policies and practices for California’s forests in the future.