Genoa I. Starrs, Katherine J. Siegel, Stephanie Larson, Van Butsic
{"title":"量化牛群放牧对加利福尼亚州纳帕县和索诺玛县年度燃烧概率的大规模影响","authors":"Genoa I. Starrs, Katherine J. Siegel, Stephanie Larson, Van Butsic","doi":"10.5751/es-15080-290310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Wildfire in California is an increasing threat to life and property. The expansion of urban and suburban development into wildlands limits risk-reduction options like prescribed burning, whereas large-scale mechanical and herbicide treatments can be cost prohibitive and unpalatable to the public. Cattle grazing is a low risk, affordable treatment not frequently considered for use explicitly for fuels reduction in California. To examine the impact of cattle grazing on fire in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California, we quantified its effects as change in average annual burn probability. Probabilities were calculated for 2001–2017 using mixed-effect regression models in combination with a range of grazing intensities and extents. These grazing scenarios were designed to represent current grazing conditions, ungrazed conditions, adding grazing to high priority landscapes, and grazing the full study area. We estimated that under current grazing conditions, cattle grazing reduces average annual burn probability 45% (from 9.9% to 5.4%) compared to ungrazed conditions. Adding grazing to high priority landscapes as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) decreased their average annual burn probability by 82% (from 7.6% to 1.4%) compared to under current grazing conditions. Of the scenarios assessed, grazing high priority landscapes heavily while maintaining the current extent and intensity of grazing on other rangelands provided the best return in terms of decreased burn probability per additional area grazed. Finally, we demonstrated how our methodologies can be utilized by fuel managers and planners to identify key areas for treatment with cattle grazing. Our findings suggest cattle grazing provides benefits to the study area by reducing overall burn probability, and that extending its use to treat fuels in priority areas in and around the wildland urban interface could provide further fire-risk reduction on community-adjacent lands. Land managers may find cattle grazing a valuable long term fuel-management tool at the landscape scale.</p>\n<p>The post Quantifying large-scale impacts of cattle grazing on annual burn probability in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>","PeriodicalId":51028,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Society","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantifying large-scale impacts of cattle grazing on annual burn probability in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California\",\"authors\":\"Genoa I. Starrs, Katherine J. Siegel, Stephanie Larson, Van Butsic\",\"doi\":\"10.5751/es-15080-290310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Wildfire in California is an increasing threat to life and property. The expansion of urban and suburban development into wildlands limits risk-reduction options like prescribed burning, whereas large-scale mechanical and herbicide treatments can be cost prohibitive and unpalatable to the public. Cattle grazing is a low risk, affordable treatment not frequently considered for use explicitly for fuels reduction in California. To examine the impact of cattle grazing on fire in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California, we quantified its effects as change in average annual burn probability. Probabilities were calculated for 2001–2017 using mixed-effect regression models in combination with a range of grazing intensities and extents. These grazing scenarios were designed to represent current grazing conditions, ungrazed conditions, adding grazing to high priority landscapes, and grazing the full study area. We estimated that under current grazing conditions, cattle grazing reduces average annual burn probability 45% (from 9.9% to 5.4%) compared to ungrazed conditions. Adding grazing to high priority landscapes as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) decreased their average annual burn probability by 82% (from 7.6% to 1.4%) compared to under current grazing conditions. Of the scenarios assessed, grazing high priority landscapes heavily while maintaining the current extent and intensity of grazing on other rangelands provided the best return in terms of decreased burn probability per additional area grazed. Finally, we demonstrated how our methodologies can be utilized by fuel managers and planners to identify key areas for treatment with cattle grazing. Our findings suggest cattle grazing provides benefits to the study area by reducing overall burn probability, and that extending its use to treat fuels in priority areas in and around the wildland urban interface could provide further fire-risk reduction on community-adjacent lands. Land managers may find cattle grazing a valuable long term fuel-management tool at the landscape scale.</p>\\n<p>The post Quantifying large-scale impacts of cattle grazing on annual burn probability in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15080-290310\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15080-290310","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quantifying large-scale impacts of cattle grazing on annual burn probability in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California
Wildfire in California is an increasing threat to life and property. The expansion of urban and suburban development into wildlands limits risk-reduction options like prescribed burning, whereas large-scale mechanical and herbicide treatments can be cost prohibitive and unpalatable to the public. Cattle grazing is a low risk, affordable treatment not frequently considered for use explicitly for fuels reduction in California. To examine the impact of cattle grazing on fire in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California, we quantified its effects as change in average annual burn probability. Probabilities were calculated for 2001–2017 using mixed-effect regression models in combination with a range of grazing intensities and extents. These grazing scenarios were designed to represent current grazing conditions, ungrazed conditions, adding grazing to high priority landscapes, and grazing the full study area. We estimated that under current grazing conditions, cattle grazing reduces average annual burn probability 45% (from 9.9% to 5.4%) compared to ungrazed conditions. Adding grazing to high priority landscapes as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) decreased their average annual burn probability by 82% (from 7.6% to 1.4%) compared to under current grazing conditions. Of the scenarios assessed, grazing high priority landscapes heavily while maintaining the current extent and intensity of grazing on other rangelands provided the best return in terms of decreased burn probability per additional area grazed. Finally, we demonstrated how our methodologies can be utilized by fuel managers and planners to identify key areas for treatment with cattle grazing. Our findings suggest cattle grazing provides benefits to the study area by reducing overall burn probability, and that extending its use to treat fuels in priority areas in and around the wildland urban interface could provide further fire-risk reduction on community-adjacent lands. Land managers may find cattle grazing a valuable long term fuel-management tool at the landscape scale.
The post Quantifying large-scale impacts of cattle grazing on annual burn probability in Napa and Sonoma Counties, California first appeared on Ecology & Society.
期刊介绍:
Ecology and Society is an electronic, peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal devoted to the rapid dissemination of current research. Manuscript submission, peer review, and publication are all handled on the Internet. Software developed for the journal automates all clerical steps during peer review, facilitates a double-blind peer review process, and allows authors and editors to follow the progress of peer review on the Internet. As articles are accepted, they are published in an "Issue in Progress." At four month intervals the Issue-in-Progress is declared a New Issue, and subscribers receive the Table of Contents of the issue via email. Our turn-around time (submission to publication) averages around 350 days.
We encourage publication of special features. Special features are comprised of a set of manuscripts that address a single theme, and include an introductory and summary manuscript. The individual contributions are published in regular issues, and the special feature manuscripts are linked through a table of contents and announced on the journal''s main page.
The journal seeks papers that are novel, integrative and written in a way that is accessible to a wide audience that includes an array of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities concerned with the relationship between society and the life-supporting ecosystems on which human wellbeing ultimately depends.