Fuels Planning: Science Synthesis and

Integration

Social Issues Fact Sheet: 16

Prescribed Fire and Visual Quality

United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

Research Note

RMRS-RN-21-16-WWW

September 2006

Social Science Team Lead:

Pamela Jakes

USDA Forest Service

North Central Research Station

1992 Folwell Avenue

St. Paul, MN 55108

pjakes@fs.fed.us

Synthesizing

Scientific

Information

for Fire and Fuels

Project Managers

Pacific Northwest

Research Station

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

Varied Impacts

The impacts of prescribed forest burning on visual quality vary widely, depending on how and when the treatment is carried out, and when visual quality is

assessed. Research shows that, while prescribed burning and other fuels treatments can lower visual quality in some situations, they can also improve it in

others.

Prescribed fire can mimic natural disturbance, like wildland fire, but the public

perceives the blackened and charred remnants negatively. Even low-intensity

prescribed burning intended to clear understory vegetation can leave scorched

earth and charred trunks. Long after the rest of the forest has greened-up, people

perceive these long-term remnants of fire negatively. This is especially true when

more severe fires kill significant numbers of overstory trees.

Low-intensity prescribed fire can help restore native ecosystems but may lower

scenic beauty ratings until the burn area has greened-up. Photo: J. Szymoniak

Visual Aspects of Different Levels of Burning

Researchers have compared the fuels reduction, aesthetic perceptions, and revenue potential of different fuels reduction treatments, with the different treatments including various levels of prescribed forest burning. They have found

that the minimal impact treatment (light thinning from below, with slash piled

and burned) was the most aesthetically preferred in ponderosa pine forests. The

revenue production treatment (moderate thinning of mature, commercial-grade

trees, no burning), which reduced fire hazard and produced the most income,

received moderately high aesthetics ratings. The forest restoration treatment (light
Social Science Team Fact Sheets

Look for fact sheet topics from the Social Science Team including information on developing personal responsibility for fuels

reduction, communicating fire hazard, topics for community

fire plans, guidelines for community education, collaboration,

and the “golden rule” for communicating fire hazard to people.

Fuels Planning: Synthesis and Integration

This fact sheet is one in a series being produced as part of a

larger project supported by the USDA Forest Service to synthesize new knowledge and information relevant to fire and fuels

management. Fact sheets address topics related to stand structure, environmental impacts, economics, and human responses

to these factors. Information in the fact sheets is targeted for the

dry forests of the Inland West, but is often applicable across

broad regions of the country. For more information, please visit

our Web site at:

www.fs.fed.us/fire/tech_transfer/synthesis/synthesis_index

Fuels Planning: Science Synthesis and Integration is an interagency research/management partnership to support the TenYear Fire Plan, led by Russell T. Graham, RMRS, and Sarah M.

McCaffrey, NCRS.

thinning and broadcast burning) was the most effective

at reducing fire hazard but rated lowest aesthetically due

to fire scars.

Interestingly, in the same study, people gave untreated

forest stands only moderate aesthetic ratings, which supports the notion that fuels management can increase

scenic beauty ratings. The study also found that not treating fuel loads can have aesthetic consequences—a control area that burned from wildland fire and then was salvage

logged received the most negative aesthetic ratings.

In another study, low-severity fires actually increased

scenic beauty ratings of a ponderosa pine ecosystem,

especially a year or two after the fires. But high-severity

crown fires decreased scenic beauty ratings. The researchers attributed this to the fact that low-severity prescribed

fire cleared out some of the dense understory vegetation, opened up views into the forest, and increased

herbaceous ground cover.

Time and Scenic Beauty

Short-term scenic benefits of prescribed fire were evident in a study that looked at the scenic impacts of burning slash after forest thinning. Initially, people perceived

the forest treated with prescribed fire more negatively than

they did an area in which the dead wood and slash remained. But after one growing season, the burned site

was rated much more scenic than the control plot with its

woody debris.

After a 5-year period, people rated the two sites virtually

equal in appearance. The study shows that prescribed burning of slash can increase scenic beauty in the short term by

removing woody debris, which is considered unsightly

by forest visitors, and by enhancing regeneration of the

understory.

It is important to note that the prescribed fire must be

thorough enough to remove dead woody debris. A study

in Montana found that partly burned woody slash lowered scenic beauty ratings for up to 15 years after timber harvesting, because the larger woody debris had not

yet decomposed. Areas where dead woody debris had

been removed after timber harvesting received more

positive scenic ratings.

Source

Ryan, Robert L. 2005. Social science to improve fuels

management: a synthesis of research on aesthetics and

fuels management. Gen Tech. Rep. NC-261. St. Paul,

MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

North Central Research Station. 58 p. Available online

at http://ncrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/viewpub.asp?key=3514

[2006, August 25]. For a hard copy, contact Pamela Jakes

at pjakes@fs.fed.us.

Additional Aesthetics Fact Sheets

Prescribed Fire and Visual Quality is one of a series of

four fact sheets on the topic of aesthetics and fuels management. See also Strategies for Managing Fuels and Visual

Quality, Social Issues Fact Sheet 13 (RMRS RN-21-13-

WWW); Landscape Preference in Forested Ecosystems, Social

Issues Fact Sheet 14 (RMRS RN-21-14-WWW); and

Landscape Change and Aesthetics, Social Issues Fact Sheet

15 (RMRS RN-21-15-WWW).