Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Chapter 4.2—Fire and Tribal Cultural Resources

Frank K. Lake 1 and Jonathan W. Long 2

Summary
Native American tribes regard plants that have evolved with frequent fire and other
natural resources as living cultural resources that provide, water, food, medicines,
and other material goods while also sustaining tribal cultural traditions. Col-
laborations between management agencies and tribes and other Native American
groups can incorporate traditional ecological knowledge to facilitate placed-based
understanding of how fire and various management practices affect tribal cultural
resources and values. Collaboration approaches reviewed in this chapter and in
chapter 9.6, “Collaboration in National Forest Management,” can foster restoration
opportunities that would benefit tribal communities and broader values. A strategy
to promote socioecological resilience may include efforts to reestablish frequent fire
regimes by emulating traditional burning practices, and to learn how larger high-
severity fires may affect cultural resources and associated values.

Introduction
This chapter reflects several of the broader themes featured in this synthesis. First,
it reinforces the perspective that humans are and have long been integral parts of
ecosystems in the synthesis area (Stevens 2005). Therefore, to the extent restoration
depends on reestablishing, at an appropriate scale, the disturbance regimes that
have shaped ecosystems, it is important to consider opportunities to reestablish or
emulate Native American forest practices, such as harvesting and burning (fig. 1).
Second, this chapter emphasizes the importance of considering system dynamics
at a range of scales, from individual organisms to large landscapes. Research has
focused on small-scale effects of tribal land management and traditional burning
practices, such as how individual plants, patches, or sites respond, but the effects
of tribal practices on larger vegetation communities and landscapes constitutes
an important subject for further research (Anderson 2006b). Lastly, this chapter
recognizes that efforts to promote socioecological resilience would be incomplete if
they did not consider how the widespread lack of fire in the synthesis area impacts
contemporary uses of forest resources by Native Americans.

1
Research ecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest
Research Station, 3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding, CA 96002.
2
Research ecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest
Research Station, 1731 Research Park Dr., Davis, CA 95618.

173
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

Belinda Aldern

Figure 1—Ron Goode of the North Fork Mono Tribe directs a burning treatment for a patch of sourberry plants (Rhus trilobata).

Many Native Americans3 have a broad conception of cultural resources, which

includes artifacts, structures, heritage sites, biophysical resources, and intangible
resources (Welch 2012). Both wildfire and prescribed fire can affect cultural
resources directly and indirectly (see fig. 2), with frequency, seasonality, extent,
and severity of fires influencing those effects. Efforts to manage wildfires can also
have lasting and detrimental effects on cultural resources through line construction,
firing operations, and other suppression, mop-up, or postfire rehabilitation activities
(Ryan et al. 2012). Emphasizing the idea that critical resources have natural, eco-
nomic, and cultural dimensions (see section 9 preface, “Social/Economic/Cultural
Components”), this chapter focuses on relationships between fire and tribal cultural
resources, especially for living resources such as plants, fungi, and animals, which
have been actively managed to sustain them in their desired quantity and qual-
ity. Plants have been a particularly important focus of research on fire effects on
cultural resources.

3
Where this chapter focuses on cultural resources within the synthesis area, it refers to
Native Americans. The term tribe is emphasized when discussing management strategies that
are likely to be implemented through consultations, collaborations, or other interactions on
a government-to-government basis. Those relationships, along with approaches to working
with tribal traditional ecological knowledge, are considered in chapter 9.6, “Collaboration in
National Forest Management.”

174
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Fire Impacts to Cultural Resources

Direct Indirect
Combusion environment
+ CR material properties
+ CR location
+ Heat transfer mechanisms
First-order effects (physical
alteration) (e.g., consumption,
cracking, melting,sooting, etc.)

Fire environment/first-order effects Human environment

+ Postfire environment (precipitation, wind) Third-order effects
Second-order effects (additional physical alterations) (socioeconomic, cultural, political)
(e.g., erosion, weathering, deflation, etc.)

Tangible Intangible
Suppression Aesthetics
Rehabilitation Sense of place
Mitigation Cultural landscape
Hunting/gathering Spiritual value
Looting/vandalism

Figure 2—Direct and indirect fire effects on environment, cultural resources, and tribal values (Ryan et al. 2012: 12).

Burning to Promote Tribal Cultural Values and

Ecological Restoration
Reestablishing traditional burning practices aligns well with ecological restoration
goals, given that many culturally valued fungi and plants produce berries, nuts,
roots, and stems that support wildlife and provide other ecological services (Ander-
son 2006a, Anderson and Barbour 2003). Restoration efforts that support traditional
tribal practices and subsistence activities can also promote other social and cultural
values, such as native language, place names and maps, ceremonies, and other ele-
ments of cultural capital that perpetuate and maintain Native American traditions
and associated ecosystems (Jordan and Shennan 2003, Long et al. 2003).
Understanding how Native American harvesting activities relate to ecological
conditions at different scales may help forest managers promote valued cultural
resources and broader restoration objectives. Native American practitioners
today, as in the past, adapt and respond to areas of the landscape affected by fires
to acquire resources of value (Anderson and Moratto 1996). Practitioners such
as basketweavers harvest individual plants or patches at a variety of locations
in a landscape (Anderson 1996, 2006a). Securing enough resources for a tribal
family requires access to different populations of target organisms distributed
across diverse ecological communities. Consequently, narrow-scale treatments

175
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

that enhance a few patches may only serve a small number of basketweavers
(Anderson 1996, 1999). Tribal communities rely on access to a variety of ecological
communities across a diverse landscape to maintain different cultural traditions,
including ceremonies, basket making, hunting, and food gathering (fig. 3). Using
fire to promote cultural resources in different ecological communities at a larger
landscape scale could enhance resource quality, diversity, and access for multiple
tribal groups, given that many Sierra Nevada tribes have similar or related cultural,
language, basketry, and subsistence traditions (Anderson 2006a, Jordan and Shen-
nan 2003).

Effects of Fire on Culturally Valued Plant Resources

Many plant species that are used by Native Americans depend on fire both for per-
sistence and for maintenance of desired growth forms and quality. In the absence
of fire, many of these species will decline in abundance or mature to a condition
A lack of fire or un-
in which the plant material is not suitable for traditional cultural uses. Examples of
desirable applications
these fire-associated plants valued highly by Native Americans and tribes are vari-
of fire (including,
ous shrubs, herbs, and graminoids used for basketry and cordage, including willows
but not limited to,
(Salix L. sp.), Indian hemp (Apocynum L.), milkweed (Asclepias L.), skunkbush
uncharacteristically
sumac (Rhus trilobata Nutt.), sedges (Carex L.), deergrass (Muhlenbergia rigens
severe wildfire) can
(Benth.) Hitchc.), California redbud (Cercis orbiculata Greene), Pacific dogwood
pose a threat to the
(Cornus nuttallii Audubon ex Torr. & A. Gray), and beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax
sustainable production
(Pursh) Nutt.); nut-producing trees, such as California black oak (Quercus kellog-
of these plants in the
gii Newberry) and beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta Marshall); berry-producing
quantity and qual-
shrubs and herbs, such as elderberry (Sambucus L.), woodland strawberry
ity desired by Native
(Fragaria vesca L.), and blueberry (Vaccinium L.); edible geophytes, including
Americans to sustain
snake lily (Dichelostemma Kunth), mariposa lily (Calochortus Pursh), and camas
traditional lifeways
(Camassia Lindl.); and plants for medicinal or ceremonial uses, such as wild
and livelihoods.
tobacco (Nicotiana L.), among many others (Anderson 1994, 1999, 2006a). A lack
of fire or undesirable applications of fire (including, but not limited to, uncharac-
teristically severe wildfire) can pose a threat to the sustainable production of these
plants in the quantity and quality desired by Native Americans to sustain traditional
lifeways and livelihoods. Three species that are culturally important and may have
broader ecological significance are discussed below.

Beargrass—
Beargrass is an important plant in the understory of conifer forests, where it has
declined in abundance in part because of fire exclusion (Charnley and Hummel
2011, Shebitz et al. 2009). Across its range, beargrass provides food and habitat for
several animals and pollinating insects, especially flies, beetles, and bees (Charnley

176
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Frank Lake

Figure 3—Black oak acorn mush, a traditional food prepared by Lois Conner Bohna in a basket
made by her grandmother, Lilly Harris, circa 1920 from roots of Santa Barbara sedge (Carex
barbarae Dewey) and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn) and stems of redbud and
deer grass.

and Hummel 2011, Hummel et al. 2012). A fire return interval of less than 20 years
may be necessary to limit encroachment and maintain desired reproduction and
growth of beargrass, as well as other valued resources associated with relatively
open understories (Shebitz et al. 2008). Consequently, efforts to replicate traditional
burning may be necessary to maintain these communities in a state similar to their
historical condition (Hummel et al. 2012).

177
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

California black oak—

California black oak is another example of a Sierra Nevada culturally significant
species that depends on forest fire. Archaeological and ethnographic evidence indi-
cate that black oak was historically one of the most important tribal food resources,
and it remains an important species of concern to Native Americans in the Sierra
Nevada (Anderson 2007, Haney 1992, Morgan 2008). The trees provide acorns for
a variety of wildlife and valuable habitat for fisher and spotted owls (North 2012).
Therefore, the tangible and intangible values of these traditional use sites connect
past tribal use to contemporary cultural and ecological values, and they reveal the
importance of promoting recovery and resilience of black oak in Sierra Nevada
mixed-conifer forests. This species has several adaptive traits to survive repeated
fires; in the absence of fire, conifers encroach, compete with the oaks for resources,
reduce the crown openings needed for robust mast production, and increase fuel
loads (Cocking et al. 2012). Mature black oak trees are susceptible to topkill by fire,
although they generally resprout from the root collar (Cocking et al. 2012, Stephens
and Finney 2002). Treatments focused solely on reducing fire hazard may not result
in retention or recruitment of California black oak (Moghaddas et al. 2008). Con-
sequently, management to promote resilience of black oak in the long term while
mitigating short-term losses of mature trees is an important challenge when design-
ing treatments to promote socioecological values.

Bearclover—
Another plant that demonstrates complex interactions in managing fire for eco-
cultural restoration is bearclover, also known as mountain misery (Chamaebatia
foliolosa Benth.). Bearclover is a low-stature shrub found in large areas of the Sierra
Nevada, and it is commonly associated with black oak. Bearclover is a traditional
medicine for Native Americans, provides for honey bees and native wildlife, fixes
nitrogen, competes strongly with conifer seedlings, and provides highly flammable
fuels to carry fires (McDonald et al. 2004). Black oak sites favored by Native
Americans for gathering acorns do not have bearclover under the trees (Anderson
2006a). Treatments intended to reduce bearclover have promoted increases in
grasses, including, where introduced, highly invasive cheatgrass (McDonald et al.
2004). Because bearclover is well adapted to burning and can be widespread, it is
likely to have had an important role in maintaining fire regimes and affecting other
forest understory species.

178
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Landscape-Scale Effects of Burning Practices

Traditional burning practices served as a disturbance that not only maintained
desired growth forms of individual plants, but also promoted desired plant commu-
nities across broader scales (Anderson 2006b). Though there has been debate about
the extent of burning carried out by Native Americans in different regions (Keeley
2002), a comprehensive review suggests that the extent was large across various
habitat types (Stephens et al. 2007). Davis et al. (1996) note that the frequency
of fire necessary to perpetuate specific resources in conditions needed by Native
Americans in the Sierra Nevada would have required extensive and intensive burn- Reintroducing
ing in important vegetation types. A primary mechanism by which fire contributes traditional burning
to the maintenance of culturally important plant species is by limiting the encroach- management practices
ment of trees and shrubs in meadow and woodland habitats (Anderson and Barbour would help increase
2003, Turner et al. 2011). Tribal land management practices served to maintain heterogeneity in
valued habitats and species diversity across landscapes, from riverine riparian areas fuel conditions and
to oak and mixed-conifer forests to montane meadows (Anderson 1994). Traditional reinstate finer grained
burning practices occurred at different frequencies and during different seasons, landscape patterns
with ignition strategies that varied according to the goals of fire use (Anderson where burning by
1999). These practices fostered a mosaic of vegetation types in different stages Native Americans was
across landscapes, which promoted food security (Charnley et al. 2008, Kimmerer important in the past
and Lake 2001). Reintroducing traditional burning management practices would and is of value today.
help increase heterogeneity in fuel conditions and reinstate finer grained landscape
patterns where burning by Native Americans was important in the past and is of
value today (Anderson 1994, Anderson and Barbour 2003, Miller and Urban 2000).

Ecological Issues in Reestablishing Frequent Fire

Plans to restore frequent fire as an ecological process must consider various effects
and interactions, especially generation of smoke. Prehistoric Native American burn-
ing practices are thought to have been significant contributors of smoke and carbon
emissions in the Sierra Nevada (Anderson 1994, Stephens et al. 2007). However,
these emissions should not necessarily be seen only as a pollutant, because smoke
in appropriate seasons can provide ecological benefits, such as control of insect
pests and enhanced germination of various plants, including beargrass (Shebitz and
James 2010) and tobacco (Preston and Baldwin 1999). For plant germination, there
are potential substitutes for natural smoke that may help compensate for fire deficits
(Landis 2000, Shebitz and James 2010). However, smoke may provide other benefits
that are not substitutable; for example, smoke from extensive fires has been hypoth-
esized to be important in moderating water temperatures by diffusing direct solar
radiation, which could in turn benefit cold water fisheries (Mahlum et al. 2011).

179
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

Additionally, smoke particles can have physiological effects on plants that could
have wider implications for ecosystem function (Calder et al. 2010).
Proposals to reintroduce frequent burning may generate other ecological
concerns. Where nonnative species are widespread, burning has potential to
negatively affect native biodiversity, including culturally valued species (Brooks
et al. 2004). For example, a study in Kings Canyon National Park cautioned that
frequent burning in areas that have been invaded by cheatgrass might facilitate
spread of the invasive grass (Keeley and McGinnis 2007). Further study would help
to understand how season of burning influences these effects (Knapp et al. 2009).
Ethnographic reports indicate that tribal burning occurred at various seasons and
may have differed from the natural lightning ignition season (Anderson 2006a). In
addition, effects of fire frequency are an important subject for research. Chapter
5.1, “Soils,” discusses the potential for frequent prescribed burning to deplete soil
nitrogen in certain circumstances. However, at present, many locations targeted for
cultural use burns are relatively nutrient-rich, have an abundance of nitrogen-fixing
plants, and occur in areas along the western slope of the Sierra Nevada region,
where nitrogen deposition rates tend to be elevated (see chapter 8.1, “Air Quality”).
Currently, the areas treated with prescribed fire for tribal cultural purposes are
so limited that concerns about nitrogen loss at the local to regional scale appear
minimal. For those reasons, burning to emulate traditional burning is not likely to
pose a risk of depleting nitrogen or adversely affect forest productivity.

Collaborations to Promote Traditional Burning and

Cultural Resources
Productive, collaborative relationships between federal forest managers and tribal
governments, communities, individuals (where appropriate), and organizations
(e.g., the California Indian Basketweavers Association) can help to prioritize forest
treatments and promote alignment with tribal concerns. Collaboration, consultation,
and other forms of engagement with local tribal governments and Native American
communities help to incorporate tribal traditional ecological knowledge in research
and forest management and to respect tribal needs and traditions regarding access
and caretaking (see chapter 9.6). Several examples of collaborations are shown in
box 4.2-1.
These types of collaborations will assist forest managers in understanding
which habitats, specific plants, or other valued resources can be perpetuated to
serve tribal needs (Anderson and Barbour 2003). Each resource of interest (e.g.,
basketry material or food-producing plants) may have a favored season, frequency,

180
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Box 4.2-1
Examples of National Forest–Tribal Collaborations
• Deergrass has been a subject of collaborative work by the Sierra National
Forest and Mono tribes (Anderson 1994, 1999, 2006a).
• As part of the proposed Sage Steppe/Dry-Forest Restoration Project, the
Modoc National Forest worked with Cultural Advocates for Native Youth,
an organization based in the Cedarville Indian Rancheria, to restore native
tobacco plants at burn piles.
• Beargrass restoration has been a subject of collaborative restoration on the
Plumas and Lassen National Forests involving Maidu tribes (Charnley et
al. 2008), as well as studies on the Olympic National Forest involving the
Quinault and Skokomish tribes (Shebitz et al. 2009).
• The Klamath and Six Rivers National Forests entered into an agreement with
the Karuk tribe to manage the Katimiin Cultural Management Area, identi-
fied in the Klamath National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, to
allow for specific cultural management activities, including reintroduction of
fire onto the landscape. The Karuk hold the culmination of their Pikyawish
(world renewal) ceremonies in this area near Somes Bar, California. The
Karuk, prior to government fire-suppression policies and efforts, used to cer-
emonially burn the mountain above Katimiin, a historical village site. This
cooperative agreement between the Forest Service and the Karuk tribe may
serve as a model for other federally recognized tribes in California.

or intensity of burning, and prescriptions may reflect a multitude of objectives for

burning (Anderson 1999, 2006a). This information can assist restoration efforts
that promote enhancement of cultural resources and address tribal values, and
it can promote landscape resilience to climate change and detrimental wildfires.
Landscape-scale modeling approaches (see chapter 1.2, “Integrative Approaches:
Promoting Socioecological Resilience”) could incorporate Native American values
and traditional burning strategies. Riparian and meadow restoration activities in
particular may provide important opportunities to promote habitat for culturally
important species (see chapter 6.3, “Wet Meadows”).

181
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

Research Gaps
Traditional burning regimes may have been an important factor in maintaining
larger vegetation communities, such as open mixed-conifer forests with sugar pine,
montane mixed-conifer forests with beargrass understory, montane meadows, and
other relatively open riparian types. Evaluating the ecological outcomes of fuels and
fire treatments that reinstate or emulate traditional burning practices in different
habitats, as suggested in the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project report by Anderson
and Moratto (1996), remains a potentially valuable avenue for research (Charnley et
al. 2007). A useful way to examine potential effects of tribal burning practices is to
consider a range of ecologically relevant scales (e.g., organism, population, com-
munity, and landscape), and the implications of burning on food webs, including
animals of ecological and cultural significance (Anderson 1997). In addition, the
historical and current responses of desired forest resources to fires of different size,
season, and severity are an important research gap, especially given the potential
for larger high-severity burn patches in the future (see chapter 1.2).

Management Implications
• Integrating cultural values into design of landscape-scale treatment strate-
gies could increase access to tribally valued resources for food, materials,
medicine, and ceremonial uses.
• Reintroducing traditional Native American burning practices at appropriate
locations within the synthesis area may yield important social and eco-
logical benefits, including landscape heterogeneity. Research is needed to
understand how factors such as season, frequency, and scale of burns (con-
sidering traditional burns, other kinds of prescribed burns, and wildfires)
influence fire effects on social and ecological values.
• Collaborations and consultations with tribes and Native American groups
can promote opportunities to learn about these fire effects and incorporate
them into forest management practices and applied restoration efforts.

Literature Cited
Anderson, M.K. 1994. Prehistoric anthropogenic wildland burning by hunter-
gatherer societies in the temperate regions—a net source, sink, or neutral to the
global carbon budget. Chemosphere. 29(5): 913–934.

Anderson, M.K. 1996. Tending the wilderness. Restoration Management Notes.

14(2): 154–166.

182
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Anderson, M.K. 1997. From tillage to table: the indigenous cultivation of

geophytes for food in California. Journal of Ethnobiology. 17(2): 149–169.

Anderson, M.K. 1999. The Fire, pruning , and coppice management of temperate
ecosystems for basketry material by California Indian tribes. Human Ecology.
27(1): 79–113.

Anderson, M.K. 2006a. Tending the wild: Native American knowledge and the
management of California’s natural resources. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 558 p.

Anderson, M.K. 2006b. The use of fire by Native Americans in California. In:
Sugihara, N.G.; van Wagtendonk, J.W.; Fites-Kaufman, J.; Shaffer, K.E.; Thode,
A.E., eds. Fire in California’s ecosystems. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press: 417–430.

Anderson, M.K. 2007. Indigenous uses, management, and restoration of oaks

of the far western United States. Tech. Note No. 2. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National
Plant Data Center. 20 p.

Anderson, M.K.; Barbour, M.G. 2003. Simulated indigenous management: a

new model for ecological restoration in national parks. Ecological Restoration.
21(4): 269–277.

Anderson, M.K.; Moratto, M.J. 1996. Native American land-use practices and
ecological impacts. In: SNEP Science Team and Special Consultants, eds. Sierra
Nevada Ecosystem Project, final report to Congress. Vol. II: assessments and
scientific basis for management options. Report No. 37. Davis, CA: Centers
for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California–Davis: 187–206.
Chapter 9.

Brooks, M.L.; D’Antonio, C.M.; Richardson, D.M.; Grace, J.B.; Keeley, J.E.;
DiTomaso, J.M.; Hobbs, R.J.; Pellant, M.; Pyke, D. 2004. Effects of invasive
alien plants on fire regimes. BioScience. 54(7): 677–688.

Calder, W.J.; Lifferth, G.; Moritz, M.A.; Clair, S.B.S. 2010. Physiological
effects of smoke exposure on deciduous and conifer tree species. International
Journal of Forestry Research. 2010: 1–7.

Charnley, S.; Fischer, A.P.; Jones, E.T. 2007. Integrating traditional and local
ecological knowledge into forest biodiversity conservation in the Pacific
Northwest. Forest Ecology and Management. 246(1): 14–28.

183
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

Charnley, S.; Fischer, A.P.; Jones, E.T. 2008. Traditional and local ecological
knowledge about forest biodiversity in the Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech. Rep.
PNW-GTR-751. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Research Station. 52 p.

Charnley, S.; Hummel, S. 2011. People, plants, and pollinators: the conservation
of beargrass ecosystem diversity in the Western United States. In: Pujol, J.L.,
ed. The importance of biological interactions in the study of biodiversity. Rijeka,
Croatia; and Shanghai, China: InTech: 127–154. Chapter 8.

Cocking, M.I.; Varner, J.M.; Sherriff, R.L. 2012. California black oak responses
to fire severity and native conifer encroachment in the Klamath Mountains.
Forest Ecology and Management. 270: 25–34.

Davis, F.W.; Stoms, D.M.; Church, R.L.; Okin, W.J.; Johnson, K.N. 1996.
Selecting biodiversity management areas. In: SNEP Science Team and Special
Consultants, eds. Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project, final report to Congress.
Vol. II: assessments and scientific basis for management options. Report No. 37.
Davis, CA: Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California–
Davis: 1503–1522.

Haney, J.W. 1992. Acorn exploitation in the eastern Sierra Nevada. Journal of
California and Great Basin Anthropology. 14(1): 94–109.

Hummel, S.; Foltz-Jordan, S.; Polasky, S. 2012. Natural and cultural history of
beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax). Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-864. Portland, OR:
U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station. 80 p.

Jordan, P.; Shennan, S. 2003. Cultural transmission, language, and basketry

traditions amongst the California Indians. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology. 22(1): 42–74.

Keeley, J.E. 2002. Native American impacts on fire regimes of the California
coastal ranges. Journal of Biogeography. 29(3): 303–320.

Keeley, J.E.; McGinnis, T.W. 2007. Impact of prescribed fire and other factors on
cheatgrass persistence in a Sierra Nevada ponderosa pine forest. International
Journal of Wildland Fire. 16(1): 96–106.

Kimmerer, R.W.; Lake, F.K. 2001. The role of indigenous burning in land
management. Journal of Forestry. (99): 36–41.

184
 Science Synthesis to Support Socioecological Resilience in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Range

Knapp, E.E.; Estes, B.L.; Skinner, C.N. 2009. Ecological effects of prescribed
fire season: a literature review and synthesis for managers. Gen. Tech. Rep.
PSW-GTR-224. Albany, CA: U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Southwest Research Station. 80 p.

Landis, T.D. 2000. Where there’s smoke… there’s germination. Native Plants
Journal. 1(1): 25–29.

Long, J.W.; Tecle, A.; Burnette, B. 2003. Cultural foundations for ecological
restoration on the White Mountain Apache Reservation. Conservation
Ecology. 8(1): article 4. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol8/iss1/art4/
(26 December 2013).

Mahlum, S.K.; Eby, L.A.; Young, M.K.; Clancy, C.G.; Jakober, M. 2011.
Effects of wildfire on stream temperatures in the Bitterroot River Basin,
Montana. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 20(2): 240–247.

McDonald, P.M.; Fiddler, G.O.; Potter, D.A. 2004. Ecology and manipulation of
bearclover (Chamaebatia foliolosa) in northern and central California: the status
of our knowledge. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-190. Albany, CA: U.S Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station. 26 p.

Miller, C.; Urban, D.L. 2000. Modeling the effects of fire management
alternatives on Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forests. Ecological Applications.
10(1): 85–94.

Moghaddas, J.J.; York, R.A.; Stephens, S.L. 2008. Initial response of conifer
and California black oak seedlings following fuel reduction activities in a
Sierra Nevada mixed conifer forest. Forest Ecology and Management.
255(8–9): 3141–3150.

Morgan, C. 2008. Reconstructing prehistoric hunter-gatherer foraging radii: a

case study from California’s Southern Sierra Nevada. Journal of Archaeological
Science. 35(2): 247–258.

North, M. 2012. Managing Sierra Nevada forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-237.
Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest
Research Station. 184 p.

Preston, C.A.; Baldwin, I.T. 1999. Positive and negative signals regulate
germination in the post-fire annual, Nicotiana attenuata. Ecology.
80(2): 481–494.

185
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PSW-GTR-247

Ryan, K.C.; Jones, A.T.; Koerner, C.L.; Lee, K.M. 2012. Wildland fire in
ecosystems: effects of fire on cultural resources and archaeology. Gen. Tech.
Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 224 p.

Shebitz, D.; James, J.E. 2010. When Smokey says “no:” fire-less methods for
growing plants adapted to cultural fire regimes. In: Riley, L.E.; Pinto, J.R.;
Dumroese, R.K., tech. coords. National proceedings: forest and conservation
nursery associations. Proceedings RMRS-P-62. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station:
15–21.

Shebitz, D.J.; Reichard, S.H.; Dunwiddie, P.W. 2009. Ecological and cultural
significance of burning beargrass habitat on the Olympic Peninsula. Ecological
Restoration. 27(3): 306–319.

Shebitz, D.J.; Reichard, S.H.; Woubneh, W. 2008. Beargrass (Xerophyllum

tenax) on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington: autecology and population status.
Northwest Science. 82(2): 128–140.

Stephens, S.L.; Finney, M.A. 2002. Prescribed fire mortality of Sierra Nevada
mixed conifer tree species: effects of crown damage and forest floor combustion.
Forest Ecology and Management. 162(2–3): 261–271.

Stephens, S.; Martin, R.; Clinton, N. 2007. Prehistoric fire area and emissions
from California’s forests, woodlands, shrublands, and grasslands. Forest Ecology
and Management. 251(3): 205–216.

Stevens, N.E. 2005. Changes in prehistoric land use in the alpine Sierra Nevada: a
regional exploration using temperature-adjusted obsidian hydration rates. Journal
of California and Great Basin Anthropology. 25(2): 187–205.

Turner, N.J.; Deur, D.; Mellot, C.R. 2011. “Up on the Mountain:” ethnobotanical
importance of montane sites in Pacific coastal North America. Journal of
Ethnobiology. 31(1): 4–43.

Welch, J.R. 2012. Effects of fire on intangible cultural resources: moving toward
a landscape approach. In: Ryan, K.C.; Jones, A.T.; Koerner, C.L.; Lee, K.M., eds.
Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on cultural resources and archaeology.
Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 157–170.
Chapter 3.

186