Western Canada Wilderness Committee

Home » Campaigns » Public Lands » Campaigns » Public Lands » readers »

BC Forest Fires

A Brief Primer on BC's 2003 Forest Fires

In the summer of 2003 British Columbia experienced a severe fire season. Tens of thousands of residents living in southern BC were displaced from their homes as forest fires ripped through wooded residential areas. The loss of homes and the destruction of thousands of hectares of forests caused many people to ask questions and search for answers. Why did this happen? Can we prevent fires of this magnitude in the future? Can we do anything differently?

The severe fire season in the summer of 2003 requires a careful analysis of the disparate factors that contributed to these events. We need a thorough understanding of the history and ecology of fire management and suppression in British Columbia before we can arrive at thoughtful conclusions that will help us to protect our public forests and the people who live near and in wooded areas.

It is often said that forestry is the engine that drives BC's economy. Although not as true in 2003 as it once was, it is not surprising that most British Columbians have some familiarity with the nature of the forests that surround our towns, villages and cities. Because BC's population is concentrated on or near the southern coast, the forests with which most people are most familiar are the majestic ancient temperate rainforest valleys. This summer, however people became aware of the equally vast stretches of “fire forest” in the province's southern interior.

Rainforests and the drier interior forests are both intricate forested ecosystems that support wildlife and a variety of plant and trees species that are specifically adapted to the different ecological conditions of these geographic areas. As the name implies, rain (and lots of it) is absolutely critical to the health and ecology of the rainforest. In the fire forest of BC's southern interior it is fire that provides one of the essential conditions for a healthy forest.

When humans think of fire, they tend to think of destruction and devastation which in part explains why the provincial government has historically pursued a policy of fire suppression in all the province's forests since the major forestry companies arrived after the Second World War. The theory, popularized in the United States by Smokey the Bear, was that fires were a threat to forest health and suppressing fires would leave trees standing for logging later.

By actively suppressing forest fires the government has unwittingly contributed to a scenario where underbrush, ingrowth of saplings and dense reforestation have created conditions where catastrophic fires become inevitable. By changing the fire regime in the southern interior's forests we have done exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Frequent, low severity restorative surface fires that contribute positively to forest health and leaves trees standing have been replaced by less frequent, catastrophic fires that burn through the crowns of trees, incinerate soil and threaten human life and property.

Another effect of suppression in BC's southern interior fire forests has been greatly reduced resistance to massive insect infestation such as we’ve seen with the mountain pine beetle.

The normal fire regime must be returned to the southern interior forests if we are to minimize the risk of another season of catastrophic fires such as we have seen in 2003. Restoring ecological balance will ultimately result in naturally diverse forests that are more resistant to fire, insects and disease, as well as forests that provide far better wildlife habitat. Human interfaces, areas where development such as houses intersect with forests, need to be carefully considered in building codes to reduce future risk to human life and property.

Below you will find more information on this year's forest fires, fire ecology and what can be done to help BC's southern interior forests return to a state closer to their natural ecology.

How bad was the 2003 fire season in British Columbia?

• There have been almost 2,500 forest and wild fires this year in BC burning 250,000 hectares of forest and grassland. 88% of fires have occurred in interior fire forests or mixed fire forests.
• Other bad years for forest fires in BC include 1998, 1990, 1985, mid-70s and early 1950s

How do forest fires start?

• The majority of forest fires start from lightning strikes hitting dry "fuel", the accumulated dry grass, brush, shrubs, small trees or 'slash' (the woody debris, branches, leaves and stumps, that is left behind after logging).
• Human caused forest fires generally account for 2 in 5 forest fires.

Is this the worst ever season for forest fires?

• It depends on how you count worst. In terms of threats to human property, yes. In terms of numbers of forest fire or hectares of forest burned, no.
• In comparison to other years, the severity of the forest fires in the Okanagan were unusually fierce. Due to decades of build-up of undergrowth, a four-year drought and weeks of unprecedented hot, dry weather the forest fires burned intensely, in some cases sterilizing the soil from the extreme heat.

What makes some years worse than others?

• There are two things that cause fire: dry fuel and something to ignite the dry fuel. There will always be an ignition source in BC (lightning) so it is the accumulation of dry fuel, or lack thereof, that would lead to a good year or a bad year. In BC's case there has been a province-wide fire suppression policy that has been actively pursued since the 1950s allowing vast amounts of fuel, twigs, needles, brush and saplings, to accumulate in BC's dry southern interior forests.
• However, all things being equal, it's very hard to say why one area has a bad year while another with exactly the same level of dried out fuel does not. Scientists are increasingly looking at the phenomenon of global warming as having a negative impact on forest health.

What, if any, impact has climate change had on forest fire frequency and severity?

• Every year for the past decade global temperatures have climbed. In BC the Okanagan is warming at twice the global rate as well as experiencing a four year drought. This has allowed the abnormally large fuel build-up from fire suppression policies to dry out faster increasing susceptibility to severe forest fires.

How can fire be good for a forest?

• It is important to distinguish between BC's southern interior fire forests and the coastal and inland rainforests when talking about the impact fire has on BC's forests.
• In a rainforest, fire is neither desirable nor normal occurring as infrequently as every 300 to 600 years. In the southern interior fire forests fire is as important to healthy forest ecology as rain is to the rainforest. High frequency, low severity, restorative surface fires have gone through the area every 25-30 years, and as frequently as every 5-7 years, from the last ice age until we instituted fire suppression policies.
• These frequent low severity surface fires (those that move along the forest floor leaving large trees intact) allowed the under-story of the forest and canopy to be kept relatively open. Additionally, low severity fires made forests more resistant to catastrophic crown fires (those that move up to and through the tops of trees) and provided habitat for many species of wildlife who are specially adapted to the southern interior forest's unique conditions.
• Fires are also an important natural mechanism to control endemic forest pests such as mountain pine beetle, dwarf mistletoe and Douglas fir beetle.
• Natural, low severity fires release nutrients into the soil and many interior tree species such as lodge pole pine depend on fire for natural regeneration. Other tree species, particularly Douglas fir, ponderosa pine and western larch, are protected from the fires by thick bark that allows them to survive low-severity ground fires.

What happens when you suppress fires in a fire forest?

• Fire suppression and replanting regulations in BC's southern interior fire forests has transformed fire-resistant open forests, such as ponderosa pine savannas, to dense even-aged forests with a dangerous and unnatural amount of fuel vulnerable to ignition by summer lightning storms. Debris on the forest floor can pre-heat the canopy during a surface fire leading to crown fires, destroying even those tree species that have evolved mechanisms to survive ground fires.
• Even-aged stands also contribute to outbreaks of mountain pine beetle (MPB), Douglas fir beetle and dwarf mistletoe which would normally be somewhat controlled through fire. For example, before forest suppression began, only 7% of interior lodge pole pine was susceptible to MPB. This number has increased to 53% since fire suppression policies and reforestation policies were introduced. Trees killed by infestation in turn create more fuel, increasing the chances of a catastrophic fire.
• By changing the fire regime you also degrade wildlife habitat causing species that are specially adapted to the fire regime to struggle for survival.
• In terms of ability to regenerate a fire forest after a catastrophic fire, at best, nutrients are volatilized (vaporized) into the air, which is believed to have happened in the Okanagan, rather than released into the soil. At worst, the thin productive upper layers of forest soils can become sterilized and incinerated. Some fires, such as the infamous Los Alamos, New Mexico fire, even vitrified the soil (melted it into glass).
• In BC typically burn sites are re-seeded with an agricultural mix of non-native grasses. This is largely for cosmetic reasons and to prevent short-term soil erosion. Non-native grasses are ecologically undesirable as they prevent an area from being colonized by native species, introduce noxious weeds such as cheat grass, and create more ground-fuel for “re-burns” in the 5 to 10 year window following a catastrophic fire.

So why have we been suppressing fires?

• Fire suppression policies were first introduced in the late 1800s through the government's policy of cultural assimilation for First Nations. Prescribed burns conducted by First Nations in BC's southern interior for many hundreds of years previously, which were integral to forest health, were outlawed or stopped indirectly as First Nations were moved onto small reserves and off traditional territories managed for wildlife and food gathering.
• The more wide spread introduction of fire suppression happened in the late 1940s and early 1950s as large swaths of provincial forests were handed over to major forestry companies through forms of surface lease called tree farm licenses and timber supply areas. Fire suppression was considered a means of "protecting" trees on the companies' tenures. At that time little was understood about the ecology of fire and the companies were likely unaware that they were putting forests at a greater risk through fire suppression.
• Since then, an increase in the number of people living near or in the southern interior fire forests has contributed to the continuation of fire suppression policies. People have been worried about smoke from prescribed burns (where a specific area is selectively burned), and the possibility of a fire getting "out of control".

Have other government policies increased the likelihood or severity of fires?

• In addition to fire suppression, clearcut logging and replanting regulations in BC's southern interior fire forests have contributed to fire susceptibility. For example, ponderosa pine savannas, once common in the interior, typically have about 35 trees per hectare. When these trees are cut, they are replanted with a minimum density of 900 trees per hectare. The result is an unnaturally dense forest that can not be supported by the soils or precipitation in the area, resulting in an even drier unhealthy forest.
• Forest policies have also been turning coastal and inland temperate rainforests into fire forests through clearcut logging. Second-growth forests planted after coastal forest clearcuts tend to be even aged stands, very close together, with a lot of branches that act as "fire ladders."

What immediate steps do we need to ensure we do not have another season of catastrophic fires in BC's southern interior?

• The goal is to work towards simply allowing surface fires to burn after natural ignitions. However, before this can happen we need to deal with removing the fuel built-up through decades of fire suppression. It is important that fuel removal is done according to sound ecological principles based on forest health.
• The first step is manually removing the accumulation of fuel. There is a cost to doing this and because we are talking about young trees (those that have grown since fire suppression began) and slash that was already left behind by logging, cost recovery is unlikely so it will involve a financial commitment from government.
• At the same time, houses built at the forest/human interface need to be built in such a way as to better protect them from fire. BC has no special building codes for people living at the southern interior fire forest interface. Recent reports have indicated that some houses built in the forest interface were apparently more flammable that the forest itself. Cedar shakes and wood siding need to be replaced with non-flammable material and stacked firewood and other fuel need to be kept away from the side of houses.
• Once the bulk of the excess fuel has been removed and houses at the interface are better protected, prescribed burns could then more safely be undertaken. Prescribed burns are deliberately lit fires, managed and controlled by a government agency for the purpose of periodically reducing fuel build up in fire forests. Prescribed burns also cost money: from $50 - $1000 per hectare depending on the size of the burn. Bigger is cheaper because there are fixed costs no matter how big it is.
• Parks Canada is currently the number one prescribed burner in the province.
• We need to ensure that areas are re-seeded with native grasses.

What are the long-term steps to restoring the ecological integrity of BC's southern interior fire forests?

• The provincial government needs to provide the resources for the development of local expertise in the area of fire forest ecology so we can truly “manage” our southern interior forests for long-term ecosystem health. In general, there is a great lack of knowledge and expertise about fire ecology in the province. There is no requirement for Registered Professional Foresters (RPFs) to understand or manage for fire. In fact, RPFs are not required to do professional upgrading of any kind which often translates to a general lack of knowledge about the current ecological understandings of forest ecosystems in the province.
• There is an immediate need for a wide-ranging inquiry that would examine forest fire management techniques and the need to engage in actions that put forest health first and foremost. Out of this a strategic plan for forest fire management would be developed.
• The Protection Branch of the Ministry of Forests has almost exclusive control for both fire suppression and site rehabilitation, yet the primary function of the ministry is to facilitate forest industry access to wood and open up new markets for that wood. We need to move fire management into an independent agency that includes representatives of the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection to better manage our forests for long-term health and biological diversity.
• Long-term stable funding must be allocated by government for a regular program of thinning and prescribed burning in BC's southern interior fire forests.