Resiliency in the face of fire: How northern forests adapt to wildfire

The amount of habitat that's in an early stage of regrowth is increasing. Additionally, with more severe and frequent burning, we're seeing a higher proportion of forests undergoing surprising shifts. These forests that are undergoing changes have implications for fire management, for people using the land and people who live in these areas, and for animals that rely on these habitats.

In terms of fire management, one positive implication is that when we see more broadleaf tree regrowth like aspen or more shrubby and grassy ground cover, that can actually lower fire activity because these species, in the event of a fire, are a less volatile fuel than a dense conifer forest. As we see more landscapes shift in this way, there could actually be a reduction in fire activity.

On the other hand, if you're an animal that depends on old growth forests, such as a woodland caribou, your habitat availability may be decreasing, and competition with other species may increase. For example, moose can actually benefit from having more early successional forests on the landscape. With more moose, there could be more wolves which then translates to issues for caribou. From another perspective, some species could benefit from having more newly burned landscapes. One example is different species of woodpecker that need these dead trees to have a food source and to reproduce successfully. When we work in recently burned sites, we can always see Black-backed woodpeckers. Similarly, we find that bison seem to enjoy hanging out in these severely burned areas, possibly due to more grasses and less fly harassment in these areas. So, there's always winners and losers.

From a human perspective, there are impacts for those that rely on the forest for food, wellbeing or lifestyle. For example, people can use the forest for timber, foraging and hunting. It can also affect how people emotionally connect to these landscapes. It can be painful to see something undergo such a dramatic change.

The future question is if we see a shift where there's an increase in tree species that lower fire risks, do we actually see less fire happening? Or has the temperature and the weather become so severe that we lose the benefit of that negative feedback?