Open Access This article is
- freely available
Fire 2018, 1(1), 3; doi:10.3390/fire1010003
Managing Fire and Biodiversity in the Wildland-Urban Interface: A Role for Green Firebreaks
Department of Pest-management and Conservation, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand
School of Environment, University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Wakehurst Place, West Sussex RH17 6TN, UK
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 19 December 2017 / Accepted: 20 December 2017 / Published: 22 December 2017
In the wildland-urban interface, the imperative is often to protect life and property from destructive fires, while also conserving biodiversity. One potential tool for achieving this goal is the use of green firebreaks: strips of low flammability species planted at strategic locations to help reduce fire spread by slowing or stopping the fire front, extinguishing embers or blocking radiant heat. If comprised of native species, green firebreaks also have biodiversity benefits. Green firebreaks have been recommended for use throughout the world, including the Americas, Europe, Asia, Africa and Australasia. However, despite this widespread endorsement, there has been little empirical testing of green firebreaks, particularly with field experiments. This knowledge gap needs addressing. Green firebreaks should be considered as part of the revegetation strategy following recent extensive wildfires in places such as New Zealand and Chile.
Keywords:biodiversity conservation; fire ecology; green firebreaks; plant flammability; wildland-urban interface
Kelly and Brotons  provided a timely and insightful discussion of the role of fire in biodiversity conservation, but what if the land management imperative is to inhibit fire spread?
Plant species differ in their inherent flammability [2,3], and boundaries of less flammable vegetation can stop or slow down wildfire, or extinguish embers being blown ahead of a fire front . Based on these principles, ‘green firebreaks’ are strips of low flammability species, planted at strategic locations across the landscape to reduce or slow fire spread , and have the potential to protect human life, property and infrastructure. If green firebreaks are comprised of native species, they can deliver biodiversity benefits such as the provision of food, habitat and dispersal opportunities for native fauna.
Also known as fire greenbelts, green firewalls, green strips, and living fire breaks, green firebreaks have been recommended for use in landscapes around the world, including the United States , New Zealand , China , Indonesia , West Africa , Peru , and Europe . However, despite their extensive use, there has been little empirical testing of green firebreaks, particularly with field experiments; a knowledge gap that needs addressing. While field-based experiments should be considered the gold standard for testing the effectiveness of green firebreaks, useful insights can be gleaned using laboratory experiments, especially those that retain plant architecture by burning shoots [12,13] or whole plants . Such tests could burn multiple species together to determine the relative contribution of low or high flammability species to the resultant fire , and hence help assess just how much biomass of low flammability plants is required to extinguish a fire that is burning a high flammability species.
While green firebreaks hold promise as a fire management and biodiversity conservation tool, they should be used in conjunction with other active and passive fire-fighting approaches, especially in extreme fire conditions. Green firebreaks comprised of native species should be considered as part of revegetation and ‘fire-resistance’ strategies in landscapes where natural succession may be slow or unlikely, such as the Port Hills, Christchurch, New Zealand (Figure 1), or Chile .
All authors wrote and revised this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- Kelly, L.T.; Brotons, L. Using fire to promote biodiversity. Science 2017, 355, 1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mutch, R.W. Wildfires and ecosystems—A hypothesis. Ecology 1970, 51, 1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, R.H.; Zipperer, W.C. Testing and classification of individual plants for fire behaviour: plant selection for the wildland-urban interface. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2010, 19, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowman, D.M.J.S. Australian Rainforests: Islands of Green in a Land of Fire; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Montgomery, K.R. Green Belts for Brush Fire Protection and Soil Erosion Control in Hillside Residential Areas; Department of Arboreta and Botanic Gardens, County of Los Angeles: Arcadia, CA, USA, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Fogarty, L.G. A flammability guide for some common New Zealand native tree and shrub species. In Forest Research Bulletin 197, Forest and Rural Fire Scientific and Technical Series Report 6; Forest Research Institute in association with the New Zealand Fire Service Commission and National Rural Fire Authority: Rotorua, Wellington, New Zealand, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, H. Green forest fire barrier. Fire Saf. Sci. 1992, 1, 157. [Google Scholar]
- Wibowo, A.; Suharti, M.; Sagala, A.P.S.; Hibani, H.; Van Noordwijk, M. Fire management on Imperata grasslands as part of agroforestry development in Indonesia. Agrofor. Syst. 1996, 36, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swaine, M.D. Characteristics of dry forest in West Africa and the influence of fire. J. Veg. Sci. 1992, 3, 365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Román-Cuesta, R.M.; Salinas, N.; Asbjornsen, H.; Oliveras, I.; Huaman, V.; Gutiérrez, Y.; Puelles, L.; Kala, J.; Yabar, D.; Rojas, M.; et al. Implications of fires on carbon budgets in Andean cloud montane forest: the importance of peat soils and tree resprouting. For. Ecol. Manag. 2011, 261, 1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xanthopoulos, G.; Caballero, D.; Galante, M.; Alexandrian, D.; Rigolot, E.; Marzano, R. Forest fuels management in Europe. In Fuels Management - How to Measure Success; Andrews, P.L., Butler, B.W., Eds.; Proceedings RMRS-P-41; USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2006; pp. 29–46. [Google Scholar]
- Jaureguiberry, P.; Bertone, G.; Díaz, S. Device for the standard measurement of shoot flammability in the field. Austral Ecol. 2011, 36, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wyse, S.V.; Perry, G.L.W.; O’Connell, D.M.; Holland, P.S.; Wright, M.J.; Hosted, C.L.; Whitelock, S.L.; Geary, L.J.; Maurin, K.J.L.; Curran, T.J. A quantitative assessment of shoot flammability for 60 tree and shrub species supports rankings based on expert opinion. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2016, 25, 466. [Google Scholar]
- Madrigal, J.; Marino, E.; Guijarro, M.; Hernando, C.; Díez, C. Evaluation of the flammability of gorse (Ulex europaeus L.) managed by prescribed burning. Ann. For. Sci. 2012, 69, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wyse, S.V.; Perry, G.L.W.; Curran, T.J. Shoot-level flammability of species mixtures is driven by the most flammable species: implications for vegetation-fire feedbacks favouring invasive species. Ecosystems 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez-Harms, M.J.; Caceres, H.; Biggs, D.; Possingham, H.P. After Chile’s fires, reforest private land. Science 2017, 356, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Fire consumes a plantation of non-native Pinus sp. near a house during the Port Hills fires, Christchurch, New Zealand, in February, 2017. Local authorities are exploring the use of green firebreaks as part of the revegetation strategy following the fires. (Photo: Joseph Johnson/Fairfax NZ)
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).