Some Like It Hot: The Truth About Forest Fire
Monica L. Bond and Richard L. Hutto
Hardly anyone rejoices when they hear of a catastrophic fire raging through a forest. And yet the fact is the hottest, most severe fire is as ecologically necessary and beneficial for western forests as rainfall or sunlight.
For 60 years, Smokey Bear has assured us that forest fires are always a terrible tragedy—a notion that originated over a century ago with industrialists who sought to control timber resources for profit, and from traditionally trained forest managers who believed the only healthy forest was a green forest.
Fire hysteria also serves the US Forest Service because most of its funding is tied to fire-fighting and logging. Those US Forest Service employees who vilify severe fire and say that tree harvesting prevents fires or “restores” forests after a fire are operating in an organization that is too narrowly focused on trees as commodities—witness the November 7, 2013 announcement by the Stanislaus National Forest that they plan to salvage log the Rim Fire near Yosemite.
Dozens of studies over the past two decades have shown that a severely burned forest is a living, thriving habitat that has always been a natural part of western forest ecosystems. Severely burned forests are filled with animals that feast on superabundant food, such as insects and seeds, created by the fire. Anyone with the opportunity to experience a severely burned forest like the Rim Fire is blessed with a cacophony of birdsong, the hum of insects, and a wildflower and pollinator show like nowhere else on the planet.
Countless plant species thrive in severely burned forests: where else to harvest a fire morel or to see fire moss? Small mammals (which also happen to be food for rare species like the spotted owl and Pacific fisher) use fire-created logs and shrubs for shelter and food. Fire-killed trees attract legions of insects that flourish in the wood beneath the charcoal bark and in the new shrubs and flowers. Many bird species seek out severely burned forests for this rich insect food source.
One species in particular, the black-backed woodpecker, is found in vastly greater numbers in severely burned forests. Along with other woodpecker species, black-backs excavate their nest holes in the dead trees, which then provide nesting sites for other animals that can’t make their own nest cavities. The species is the best-adapted woodpecker in the world for extracting beetle larvae from fire-killed trees, and has become an icon for the ecological importance of severely burned forests.
Unfortunately, it’s hard to dispel the myth that forest fires are nothing but bad. And the myth perpetuates expensive, ecologically damaging, and unnecessary fire suppression and logging (all funded by taxpayers, of course) in places far from where fire threatens human lives and property.
That’s where the press comes in: it’s time for the media to provide an ecologically literate perspective on forest fires. Forest “restoration” after severe fire is completely unnecessary because severe fire itself restores habitat for fire-dependent species. Nearly every scientific study ever conducted on the effects of post-fire salvage logging—an activity perpetuated by fire hysteria—has shown that you can’t extract timber from burned forests without inflicting serious ecological damage.
We encourage everyone to visit the Rim Fire area and see for themselves the transformative power of severe fire and nature’s exuberant response. We need to look at the science, rather than listening to outdated and sometimes self-serving myths about the villainy of forest fire. Severe fires create an important and rare habitat—one that we should celebrate and protect. This will only happen if enough people learn the truth and speak out in its defense.
For 60 years, Smokey Bear has assured us that forest fires are always a terrible tragedy—a notion that originated over a century ago with industrialists who sought to control timber resources for profit, and from traditionally trained forest managers who believed the only healthy forest was a green forest.
Fire hysteria also serves the US Forest Service because most of its funding is tied to fire-fighting and logging. Those US Forest Service employees who vilify severe fire and say that tree harvesting prevents fires or “restores” forests after a fire are operating in an organization that is too narrowly focused on trees as commodities—witness the November 7, 2013 announcement by the Stanislaus National Forest that they plan to salvage log the Rim Fire near Yosemite.
Dozens of studies over the past two decades have shown that a severely burned forest is a living, thriving habitat that has always been a natural part of western forest ecosystems. Severely burned forests are filled with animals that feast on superabundant food, such as insects and seeds, created by the fire. Anyone with the opportunity to experience a severely burned forest like the Rim Fire is blessed with a cacophony of birdsong, the hum of insects, and a wildflower and pollinator show like nowhere else on the planet.
Countless plant species thrive in severely burned forests: where else to harvest a fire morel or to see fire moss? Small mammals (which also happen to be food for rare species like the spotted owl and Pacific fisher) use fire-created logs and shrubs for shelter and food. Fire-killed trees attract legions of insects that flourish in the wood beneath the charcoal bark and in the new shrubs and flowers. Many bird species seek out severely burned forests for this rich insect food source.
One species in particular, the black-backed woodpecker, is found in vastly greater numbers in severely burned forests. Along with other woodpecker species, black-backs excavate their nest holes in the dead trees, which then provide nesting sites for other animals that can’t make their own nest cavities. The species is the best-adapted woodpecker in the world for extracting beetle larvae from fire-killed trees, and has become an icon for the ecological importance of severely burned forests.
Unfortunately, it’s hard to dispel the myth that forest fires are nothing but bad. And the myth perpetuates expensive, ecologically damaging, and unnecessary fire suppression and logging (all funded by taxpayers, of course) in places far from where fire threatens human lives and property.
That’s where the press comes in: it’s time for the media to provide an ecologically literate perspective on forest fires. Forest “restoration” after severe fire is completely unnecessary because severe fire itself restores habitat for fire-dependent species. Nearly every scientific study ever conducted on the effects of post-fire salvage logging—an activity perpetuated by fire hysteria—has shown that you can’t extract timber from burned forests without inflicting serious ecological damage.
We encourage everyone to visit the Rim Fire area and see for themselves the transformative power of severe fire and nature’s exuberant response. We need to look at the science, rather than listening to outdated and sometimes self-serving myths about the villainy of forest fire. Severe fires create an important and rare habitat—one that we should celebrate and protect. This will only happen if enough people learn the truth and speak out in its defense.
