Fire management and invasive plants: a handbook

              Fire Management

and Invasive Plants

A Handbook

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Cover: Prescribed burn to treat salt cedar

(Tamarix spp.). Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

by Matthew Brooks

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Western Ecological Research Center

and

Michael Lusk

National Wildlife Refuges

Invasive Species Coordinator

4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Rm. 655B

Arlington, VA 22203

Fire Management

and Invasive Plants

A Handbook

Acknowledgements:

We would like to thank the following people for their

contributions to the publication of this Handbook.

Jenny Ericson for general project oversight.

Karen Murphy, Fred Wetzel, Bill Leenhouts, and

Karen Phillips for their numerous reviews of the

document and resulting edits. Mara Weisenberger

for proofreading and editing the document and

supplying photos. Sue Wilder for gathering

information on fire and invasive species policy.

Karen Miranda Gleason and Kevin Kilbride for

providing background information. Brian McManus,

Chris Pease, Art Latterell and Andy Loranger for

their continued support of the project and help in

moving the project to completion. Aaron Fester for

editing the document to make it more accessible to

the field. Mark Newcastle for layout, format and

design. The compilation and synthesis of information

and the final production of this Handbook was

supported by funding from the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, National Refuge System, Branch of

Fire Management; U.S. Geological Survey, Invasives

and Ecosystems programs; and numerous projects

administered by the Joint Fire Science Program,

most notably project #00-1-2-04.

Suggested citation:

Brooks, M. and M. Lusk. 2008. Fire Management

and Invasive Plants: a Handbook. United States

Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington Virginia, 27

pp.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary and General Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Section I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Introduction

Section II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Definitions

Section III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

How Do Plant Invasions Occur?

Section IV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Why Should the Management of Invasive Plants and Fires Be Combined?

Section V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

General Operational Guidelines for Fire Management

Section VI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Specific Operational Guidelines for Major Fire Management Activities

Section VII. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Effectiveness Monitoring

Section VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Bibliography

Appendix A. .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Laws, Policies And Planning Documents

Guiding the Management of Invasive Plants and Fire

1

Fire management can help maintain natural

habitats, increase forage for wildlife, reduce fuel

loads that might otherwise lead to catastrophic

wildfire, and maintain natural succession. Today,

there is an emerging challenge that fire managers

need to be aware of: invasive plants. Fire

management activities can create ideal opportunities

for invasions by nonnative plants, potentially

undermining the benefits of fire management

actions.

 

 

This manual provides practical guidelines that fire

managers should consider with respect to invasive

plants.

What’s the Link Between Fire and Plant Invasion?

The growth and spread of any plant species depends

on two main factors:

1) plant propagule availability: the abundance of

seeds and other plant propagules (i.e., parts of a

plant that can produce a new individual), and

2) plant resource availability: the amount and quality

of resources (sunlight, soil nutrients, etc.) that newly

arrived propagules need to grow.

Postfire conditions can create ideal habitat for

certain plants. When those conditions are created

within easy range of the propagules of invasive

plants, the situation is ripe for an invasion. The

graphs below (Box 1.) illustrate both invasion

potential and subsequent management strategy

based on the relationship between plant propagule

availability and resource availability.

What Can Fire Managers Do?

The best approaches fire managers can take for

reducing the potential for invasive plant infestations

are to minimize or eliminate the introduction of

invasive plant propagules into fire management

areas and minimize the amount of resources

available to any such plants that might find their way

into the burned area.

Primary Guidelines

At a minimum, the following should be applied in all

situations:

   Prevent Dispersal of Invasive Plants:

••Locating fire camps and staging areas in areas

relatively free of weeds and other invasive plants.

Plant Propagules

Plant Resources

high

invasion

potential

low

invasion

potential

Invasion Potential

Plant Propagules

Plant Resources

management

response

unnecessary

Management Strategy

reduce

resource

availability

reduce

both

factors

reduce

propagule

pressure

Box 1. Invasion potential and management strategy.

Executive Summary and

General Recommendations

2

••Washing vehicles and equipment before and after

being used within a project area (i.e., treatment

area, fireline).

••Ensuring that any revegetation (i.e., seed mixes)

or other organic material (i.e., straw mulch) that

is introduced into the project area is certified as

weed-free.

   Minimize Resources Available to Invasive

Plants:

••Remove only enough vegetation to accomplish

the management objectives (i.e., creating a

managed fuel zone, constructing a fireline).

••As an alternative to vegetation removal, consider

replacing highly flammable vegetation with less

flammable vegetation when creating a managed

fuel zone.

Are Additional Steps Necessary?

The above guidelines should be applied to all

situations. You will need more information––

primarily regarding propagule and resource

availability––to determine if additional preventative

methods are necessary. In these cases, fire

managers need to prioritize which actions will

provide the best results, and these actions can vary

depending on the circumstances associated with

each individual fire. Consult the reference guide

below that includes additional site-based guidelines

providing more specific recommendations associated

with four typical scenarios.

1. Low Propagule Availability

and Low Resource Availability

No major management actions are warranted.

   Low propagule availability can occur if survey

data indicate few populations and low densities of

invasive plants.

   Low resource availability can occur where

vegetation loss is relatively low and/or recovery

potential is high. Examples include fuels projects

that thin but do not completely remove vegetation

or fires where burn severities are relatively low

and/or native vegetation cover is expected to

reestablish within a few years.

   Almost all management actions have the potential

to cause unexpected and undesirable effects (i.e.,

seed mixes or straw mulch can be contaminated

by unwanted species), so they should only be

implemented if there are compelling reasons to

do so.

2. Low Propagule Availability

and High Resource Availability

Management actions should focus on minimizing

resource availability.

   In this scenario resource availability is high, such

as following complete removal of vegetation to

create managed fuel zones or after a high severity

fire. If the area has high levels of resource

availability, then it may be most effective to focus

management efforts on reducing these factors.

However, the absence or rarity of invasive plants

may warrant little or no additional management

response.

3. High Propagule Availability

and Low Resource Availability

Management actions should focus on minimizing

propagule availability.

   If the area in question is in proximity to large

source populations of invasive plants, then

management of propagule dispersal into the area

may be the best strategy. Focus on preventing the

dispersal of propagules into the project areas, and

on eradicating newly established individuals and

populations at the edges of the invasive plants’

range. Follow-up monitoring is always required to

determine if re-treatment is needed.

4. High Propagule Availability

and High Resource Availability

Management actions are warranted to minimize

both plant propagule availability and resource

availability as discussed above.

3

Using fire as a tool to manage at the landscape scale. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

Low Propagule/Low Resource

No major management actions are warranted

where

   Vegetation loss from fire is low

   Native vegetation is expected to return

quickly

High Propagule/Low Resource

Management actions should focus on

minimizing propagule availability where

   Area in question is in proximity to large

source populations of invasive plants.

Low Propagule/High Resource

Management actions should focus on

minimizing resource availability where

   Native vegetation is completely removed

but invasive plants are rare or absent from

the area.

High Propagule/High Resource

Management actions are warranted to

minimize both plant propagule availability

and resource availability as discussed above

where

   Native vegetation is completely removed

(fuel load management, severe wildfire), and

invasive propagules have access to the area.

Box 2. Summary of Guidelines.

4

The purpose of this manual is to provide practical

guidelines for fire managers to effectively integrate

invasive plant management activities into their

fire management programs. Traditionally, fire

management and invasive plant management

have been conceived and implemented as separate

programs. This manual is designed to help land

managers bridge the gap between these two

disciplines, and in particular give fire managers

the tools they need to integrate invasive plant

management strategies into the fire planning

process. Although this handbook is tailored

specifically for the fire management community

within the National Wildlife Refuge System of the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it is also relevant

to other agencies and organizations that manage

wildland fire.

Section I

Introduction

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service fire crew conducting a prescribed burn. USFWS.

5

One of the potentially confusing aspects of invasive

plant management relates to definitions. Many

different terms have been associated with plants

that are land management problems or deemed

undesirable for one reason or another. Because

these terms are often used interchangeably in

management documents, and their usage can be

confusing, some of the most commonly used terms

are defined below. Several commonly used fire

management terms are also described to encourage

consistency across programs.

Accidentally Introduced. Species that dispersed

without intentional human intervention, such as

contaminants of plant stock or planting materials

(i.e., mulches), or by attaching to equipment, shoes,

or animals.

Deliberately Introduced. Species that were

intentionally transported to and cultivated in new

areas for various purposes such as livestock forage,

erosion control, or ornamental horticulture, but

then subsequently spread into areas where they are

unwanted.

Fire Behavior. The rate of spread, residence time,

flame length, and flame depth of an individual fire.

Fire Hazard. Fuel conditions that are deemed

hazardous to human life, property, or valued land

management resources (i.e., natural, cultural,

recreational).

Fire Regime. Defined by type (ground, surface,

or crown fire), frequency (i.e., return interval),

intensity, severity, size, spatial complexity, and

seasonality of fire within a given geographic area or

vegetation type.

Fuel Zone. A defined area within which fuels are

managed to influence fire behavior and/or fire

regimes.

Invasibility or Invasion Potential. The tendency

of a landscape (plant community, ecosystem, or

geographic region) to being invaded.

Invasion. In this handbook, the term is used to

mean both the: 1) spread and establishment of new

species into an area they did not previously occupy;

and 2) increase in dominance (i.e., % density, cover,

and/or biomass) of species previously present but

relatively uncommon within an area.

Invasiveness. The tendency of a species to

successfully invade a landscape.

Section II

Definitions

Fuel types and weather conditions contribute to fire behavior. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

6

Invasive Species. Federal Agencies are encouraged

to use the definition of invasive species established

by Executive Order 13112. By this definition invasive

species are both nonnative to the region of interest

and cause environmental or economic harm or harm

to human health.

Management Unit. This term is used in this

handbook as a generic term that refers to a specific

area of interest. These areas of interest typically

include individual postfire management projects,

fire management units (FMUs) or the entire area

encompassed by a fire management plan.

Nonnative. This term refers to species that are not

native to a particular ecosystem. It provides a more

objective criterion than the term weed. Other terms

that have been used as synonyms for nonnative

include alien, exotic, introduced, non-indigenous,

acclimatized, adventive, escaped, feral, foreign,

naturalized, immigrant, and xenobiotic.

Plant Propagules. Parts of plants (i.e., seeds,

rhizomes, tubers, etc.) that are capable of

independent propagation of a new individual.

Plant Resources. Physical resources that can limit

plant growth, primarily including sunlight, water,

and mineral nutrients.

Weed. To qualify as a weed, a plant only needs to

be considered out of place or otherwise unwanted

where it is currently growing. In wildland settings

the term weed is not sufficient and a more specific

definition is required.

A prescribed burn at Chesapeake Marshlands National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Photo by Gerald Vickers,

USFWS.

7

Plant invasions can occur for several reasons. The

type of habitat disturbance, proximity to previously

invaded sites, the number and means available to

spread propagules, altered resource levels, and

disruption of ecological processes have all been

associated with invasive plants spreading into new

areas. All of these factors can be broadly lumped

into two primary variables (See Figure 1):

1. the availability of plant propagules; and

2. the availability of plant resources.

Plant Propagules

When considering plant propagule availability, it is

important to consider the species they represent in

addition to their abundance. If numerous propagules

reach an area, but their specific characteristics are

not adapted to the local environment, they are not

likely to establish a population. Even if propagules

are well suited for establishing and reproducing in

a new environment, they still may not establish a

population if the initial number of propagules is too

small.

In contrast, if many propagules disperse that

are compatible in a new environment, then a new

population is likely to establish. Propagules can

be introduced deliberately (i.e., added to postfire

seeding mixes) or accidentally (i.e., contaminant

species in postfire seeding mixes or straw mulch)

(Fig. 2, link A). Plant propagule numbers can be

reduced by seed predators (i.e., mice, squirrels, and

many birds) or diseases that reduce the reproductive

rates of invasive plants. Established invasive

populations can spread locally, creating a feedback

loop that can become problematic (Fig. 2, link C).

Section III

How Do Plant Invasions Occur?

Plant Propagules

Plant Resources

(includes water, sunlight, and mineral nutrients)

high

invasion

potential

low

invasion

potential

Invasion Potential

Plant Propagules

(number of seeds and other plant parts capable of

reproducing available to establish or increase a population)

Plant Resources

Management Strategy

reduce

resource

availability

reduce

propagule

availability

Figure 1. Main factors affecting plant invasions (adapted from Brooks 2007)

A Recipe for Trouble

Invasive potential is highest when propagules of invasive plants are likely to reach new areas

that offer the combination of resources (soil nutrients, sunlight and moisture) necessary to

establish and compete with native plants for these resources.

8

Resource Availability

In vegetation types where there is frequent natural

disturbance, native vegetation is often able to

recover quickly (i.e., by resprouting or establishing

from seed), and therefore high resource availability

following disturbance may not be a factor in invasive

plant populations becoming established.

In other vegetation types, plant resource availability,

particularly soil nutrients, can affect whether

invasive plants become established. Following a

fire, such resources can be increased directly, (i.e.,

postfire fertilization) or indirectly from the sudden

reduced competition for nutrients after vegetation is

removed (Fig. 2, link B).

Established populations of invasive plants can affect

the supply of resources available (Fig. 2, link D).

For example, some invasive plants might limit the

growth of other species through competition or

inhibition of nutrient uptake.

Processes that reduce plant resource availability,

such as postfire recovery of vegetation, can reduce

invasion potential. As vegetation recovers, resource

uptake increases.

Invasive Species

Abundance

Plant Propagules

Deliberate

Dispersal

Accidental

Dispersal

Plant Resources

Increasing

Input

Decreasing

Uptake

A B

C D

Figure 2. Relationships between propagule availability, resource availability, and invasive

species abundance (adapted from Brooks 2007). Plant propagules (A) and plant resources

(B) both affect the abundance of nonnative plant populations. Once these populations are

established, they can affect plant propagules (C) and plant resources (D).

Regrowth of grass postfire. Photo by M.

Weisenberger, USFWS

Golden crownbeard (Verbesina encelioides) regrowth

following a prescribed burn in pinyon-juniper

habitat. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

9

There are three general reasons why management

of invasive plants should be combined with the

management of fires:

1) Fires can promote plant invasions.

2) Fire can be used as a tool to control plant

invasions.

3) Plant invasions can affect fuels, fire behavior,

and fire regimes.

1. Fires Can Promote Plant Invasions

Fires can quickly and dramatically change the

landscape and alter the competitive balance within

the biotic community. Fires consume plant biomass,

which increases the availability of light and reduces

the consumption of soil nutrients, thus increasing

invasion potential during at least the first few

postfire years (Fig. 2).

Most invasions by nonnative plants that have been

reported in the scientific literature report situations

where invasive plants were already established

within landscapes prior to fire. However, disturbance

as a result of a fire event served as an opportunity

for invasive plants to expand their local distributions

and dominance.

Although fire may not be necessary for an invasive

plant to become established in an area, it may allow

the population to expand to the point that it harms

the local ecosystem. From an ecological standpoint

and from the perspective of land managers, such

negative effects represent the area of greatest

concern, and may require a response.

In some native vegetation types that are fire

dependent (i.e., chaparral), increased dominance of

invasive plants may be fleeting; native vegetation

quickly recovers and outcompetes invasive plants.

Where native vegetation is not dependent on fire,

however, the plants do not respond fast enough,

allowing invasive plants to establish and spread

(i.e., some desert shrublands).

Thus, the effects of fire on the spread of invasive

populations can depend on the biology of the native

vegetation, such as the rate at which it recovers

following fire.

Section IV

Why Should the Management

of Invasive Plants and Fires Be

Combined?

Burning piles of Russian thistle (Salsola spp.) to control seed dispersal. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

10

2. Fire Can be Used to Control Plant Invasions

Fire has been used since pre-historic times to

manage vegetation for various purposes. Modern

use of fire in wildland areas has focused on

treatments to reduce hazardous fuel loads, restore

historical disturbance regimes, improve forage and

habitat for game and livestock, promote biodiversity,

and manage nonnative invasive plants. Much of

what is currently known about using fire to control

invasive plants has been derived from studies of

cropland systems. Unfortunately, there are many

fundamental differences between cropland and

wildland settings, and our ability to use information

derived from croplands to predict effects that may

occur in wildlands is limited.

Fire has been used effectively to control invasive

late season annual broadleaf and grass species,

particularly yellow starthistle (Centaurea

solstitialis), medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae),

barbed goatgrass (Aegilops triunciallis),

and some brome grasses (Bromus spp.). A limited

number of invasive biennial broadleaves [i.e.,

sweetclover (Melitotus spp.) and garlic mustard

(Alliaria petiolata)], perennial grasses [i.e.,

bluegrasses (Poa spp.) and smooth brome (Bromus

inermis)], and woody species [i.e., brooms (Cytisus

spp.) and Chinese tallow (Triadica sebifera)] have

also been successfully controlled with fire. The most

success comes when fire is integrated with other

control strategies (i.e., herbicides, mechanical)

within an integrated pest management framework.

Most scientific studies have focused on the responses

of specific invasive plants and largely disregard how

other species or the plant community responds as a

whole. This lack of information is a major problem

for land managers because the ultimate reason for

controlling invasives in the first place is to reduce

the dominance of the invasive species and increase

the dominance of the desired native species. Other

objectives may include increasing the status and/

or health of endangered plants, wildlife and insect

populations, and hydrologic function. If these results

are not achieved, then using fire to control target

invasive plant infestations may not be worth the

effort.

Land managers considering using fire to control

invasive plants should be careful to examine the

characteristics of the target invasive species. The

survival rate of plants depends on the degree to

which reproductive tissues are protected from

a fire’s lethally high temperatures. Plants with

reproductive tissues located below ground (i.e.,

seeds or tubers) have higher survival rates and tend

to recover more quickly than plants with vegetative

tissues located above ground (i.e., many shrubs and

trees) (Table 1).

Exposure of regenerative tissue

to damage from fire

Depends on if seeds are

located above-ground on the

parent plant, or at or below

the soil surface after they have

dispersed from the parent plant.

Protected from fire due to soil

insulation above them.

Depends on the percentage of

litter burned and the amount of

smoldering combustion.

Non-fire-adapted shrubs can

be killed by fire due to their

positioning directly in the flame

zone of surface fires.

Can be killed by crown fire

that passes though the plant

canopies, or by surface fire that

girdles the trees.

Life Form (Raunkiaer type)

Annual plants

Bulbs or corms

Rhizomatous plants

Shrubs

Trees

Regenerative tissue

Seeds that reside on or under

the soil surface, or on dead

plants

Living tissue well below the soil

surface

Living tissue just above or

below the soil surface

Living tissue just above the soil

surface

Living tissue well above the soil

surface

Table 1. Effects of fire on different plant life forms (modified from Pyke et al. in prep).

11

3. Plant Invasions Can Affect Fuels, Fire Behavior,

and Fire Regimes

One significant way that invasive plants can affect

the areas they are invading is by changing fuel

properties, which then affects fire behavior (Table

2). If the altered fuel properties remain or increase

after burning, then the fire regimes may be altered.

When altered fire regimes promote the spread of the

invaders that cause the changes in the first place,

then the system is considered to be in an invasive

plant / fire regime cycle.

There are four phases that lead to the establishment

of an invasive plant/fire regime cycle:

Phase 1 involves the initial spread of invasive plants

into an area.

Phase 2 is characterized by establishment of self-perpetuating

populations of the invasive plant.

Phase 3 occurs when the plant spreads beyond the

area first infested, especially disturbed sites into less

disturbed wildland sites, and begins to negatively

impact surrounding native plant communities.

Phase 4 results in fuel properties being changed to

the point that the natural fire regime shifts. If the

new fire regime favors the spread of the invasive

species and reduces the native species, an invasive

plant/fire regime cycle becomes established (Fig. 3).

The most well-known effects of plant invasions

on fire regimes involve those that increase the

frequency, intensity, or length of the fire season.

Collectively, these changes increase what are

commonly referred to as “fire hazards.” For

example, annuals grasses that have invaded

shrublands can increase the frequency of fire and

the length of the fire season in the western United

States, and invaders that increase the woody fuel

load can increase fire intensity in the southeastern

United States. In addition, invading plants with

high tissue flammability (i.e., Eucalyptus) can ignite

easier and burn more intensely.

Plant invasions don’t always increase fire hazards,

and in some cases can actually reduce them.

Invasions can make fuelbeds less flammable

by increasing live fuel moisture, decreasing

fuel continuity, or decreasing fuel loads (Table

2). Examples are harder to find because managers

are generally less concerned about decreased

fire hazards than they are about increased fire

hazards. Potential examples include succulents (i.e.,

cactus and iceplant spp.) invading shrublands and

increasing live fuel moisture, or trees that shade

out surface vegetation and reduce surface fuel

continuity.

Table 2. Primary effects of fuelbed changes on fire regimes.*

Fuelbed Change Fire Regime Change

Increased amount (load) Increased fire intensity and seasonal





burn window; increased likelihood of crown fire

Decreased amount (load) Decreased fire intensity and seasonal



burn window; decreased likelihood of crown fire

Increased horizontal continuity Increased fire frequency and extent

Decreased horizontal continuity Decreased fire frequency and extent

Increased vertical continuity Increased likelihood of crown fire

Decreased vertical continuity Decreased likelihood of crown fire

Change in packing ratio Change in fire frequency, intensity, and



seasonality

Increased plant tissue flammability Increased fire frequency, intensity, and



seasonal burn window

Decreased plant tissue flammability Decreased fire frequency, intensity, and



seasonal burn window

* Modified from Brooks et al. (2004) Table 1

12

As fire regimes and other ecosystem properties

become altered, restoration of pre-invasion

conditions becomes increasingly more difficult and

costly. As the invasive plant infestation spreads and

alters the fire regime, the number of management

actions and cost to restore native ecosystem

functions increases, while the probability of success

decreases. This is because restoration can ultimately

require managing fuel conditions, fire regimes,

native plant communities and other ecosystem

properties, in addition to the invaders that caused

the changes in the first place.

As with other ecological impacts caused by plant

invasions, the most cost effective way to prevent the

establishment of an invasive plant / fire regime cycle

is to take preventative steps early on in the process.

Figure 3. The Invasive Plant/Fire Regime Cycle. Modified from Brooks, et al. (2004).

+ Fire Regime

Fuels

-

Nonnative Plants Nonnative Plants

-

Prescribed burn on Buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare) on the Lower Rio Grande NWR. Photo by South Texas

Fire District, USFWS.

13

General guidelines have recently been published

for reducing the spread and dominance of invasive

plants in postfire landscapes (Asher et al. 2001,

Goodwin et al. 2002, Keeley 2003). Collectively

these publications present the following general

recommendations: 1) in response to individual

fires, procedures should be implemented to reduce

inadvertent dispersal of weeds into or within the

burned area; 2) areas where invasive plants of

particular concern are likely to invade or increase in

dominance should be targeted for control efforts;

3) additional revegetation treatments of other

species may be effective at competing with the

target invasives by reducing resource availability;

and 4) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

analyses that are likely to be required prior to

implementing postfire control treatments (i.e.,

herbicide use) should be completed and ready to use

before the fire season. A Pesticide Use Plan (PUP) is

also required before herbicides can be approved for

use.

Although these existing guidelines are helpful, they

are basically checklists of do’s and don’ts, and there

is always the chance that situations may arise where

appropriate guidance is not found on one of the lists.

For example, these guidelines generally focus on fire

suppression and postfire emergency stabilization,

rehabilitation, and restoration activities, and do not

address issues associated with fuels management.

They also do not explicitly integrate fire

management with other land management programs

during the years leading up to and following fires,

nor do they provide specific guidance on prioritizing

which actions may be most effective

in a given situation.



The approach of this handbook is to explain the

primary mechanisms associated with plant invasions

(i.e., resource availability and propagule availability),

and provide examples of how their effects can be

mitigated to minimize invasion potential. With

a basic working understanding of the invasion

Section V

General Operational Guidelines



for Fire Management

Prescribed fire for standing-dead salt cedar. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

14

process, a land manager can then better evaluate

how best to integrate fire management actions

(preparedness, suppression, wildland fire use,

prescribed fire, hazardous fuels and post-wildfire

recovery treatments,) into overall land management,

especially when they encounter situations that

are not described in existing guidelines. This

knowledge will also help land managers prioritize

the prevention steps that are most important for

reducing invasion potential in their particular

situation. Examples are provided below that focus

on minimizing plant propagules and resource

availability, using the conceptual model presented

earlier in this document (Figs. 1 and 2). In later

sections the conceptual model is applied to managing

invasive plants in the context of specific fire

management activities.

Minimizing Propagule Availability

Propagule availability can be reduced by ensuring

that seeding treatments do not include species that

may become management problems in the future

(Table 3). Careful consideration of all the problems

associated with introductions of both nonnative

plants, and native species outside of their native

ranges, is the easiest way to reduce invasive species.

Regional lists of invasive plants can be consulted to

help inform fire managers of plants to avoid.

A much greater challenge involves managing

propagule availability due to accidental dispersal of

invasive plants from outside of a management unit

(Table 3). This includes both long-distance dispersal

from outside of the management unit and short-distance

dispersal from adjacent areas, some of

which may lie within the management unit. Sources

of long-distance dispersal include vehicles and other

mechanized equipment, personal items (clothes,

boots, camping equipment), livestock from distant

locations, seed mixes or other vegetation stock, and

erosion control materials from distant locations (i.e.,

soils, rock, hay mulch). These sources are connected

primarily to human transportation, so control can

be focused where they enter the management unit

of interest (i.e., fire camps, erosion control project

areas). Short-distance dispersal from adjacent areas

is much more difficult to manage than long-distance

dispersal, because sources and pathways include all

of the above plus mechanisms such as wind, water,

wildlife, human foot traffic, and other localized

human activities.

The challenge in managing invasions that arise from

outside of a management unit is in detecting and

eradicating the new invaders before they establish

local populations. Necessary steps to detect and

eradicate these new invaders include reducing

dispersal rates, detecting newly established

individuals, and eradicating them. Each of these

steps is potentially very costly, so land managers

need to evaluate how to get the most “bang for the

buck.”

Minimizing Resource Availability

One of the most obvious recommendations for

reducing the likelihood an area will be invaded is

to reduce resource inputs such as adding nitrogen

or phosphorous to the soil (Table 3). Second only

to soil moisture, these nutrients are often the

primary limiting factors of plant growth. It may

seem like a good idea to add these nutrients to give

native vegetation some help as they recover from

a fire event, but unfortunately invasive plants can

often take advantage of large increases in nutrient

availability more effectively than native plants.

Increased invasive plant biomass fueled by nutrient

additions creates additional water demands, and

can lead to increased competition for soil moisture.

For similar reasons, the use of nitrogen-fixing plants

which can increase available soil nitrogen should be

used with caution in revegetation treatments.

Resource availability can also be reduced by

maximizing resource uptake (Table 3). This can

be done by retaining existing vegetation as much

as possible in fuels treatments. For example, if

hazard fuels reduction can be achieved by only

removing ladder fuels, while retaining surface and

canopy fuels, then the potential for subsequent

plant invasion should be lower than if surface

fuels or surface and canopy fuels are removed as

well. Resource uptake can also be accomplished

by adding vegetation in postfire emergency

rehabilitation projects. Carbon sources, such as

organic mulches, can help reduce levels of available

nitrogen.

15

Minimize accidental dispersal

Decontaminate equipment by washing after

use and/or before using at a new geographic

location.

Implement an early detection and rapid

response plan during the first 3 years following

fire to detect and eradicate new populations of

invasive plants within the management unit.

Implement a control and monitoring plan during

the first 3 years following fire to keep existing

invasive plant populations from spreading within

the management unit.

Maximize resource uptake

Reduce loss of vegetation biomass

Promote the re-establishment of desirable

vegetation, either through direct seeding,

planting or implementation of appropriate land-use

regimes (i.e., temporary closures to grazing)

Use carbon sources (i.e., organic mulches) to

reduce available soil nitrogen.

Prevent deliberate dispersal

Carefully evaluate plants considered for

use in revegetation projects to ensure that

they are unlikely to become management

problems in the future.

Minimize resource input

Avoid using nitrogen or phosphorous soil

amendments

Avoid revegetating with nitrogen-fixing

plants (i.e., legumes)

Table 3. General recommendations for minimizing the potential for plant invasions following fire

and fire management actions.

Plant Propagules

Plant Resources

16

Fuels Management

Fuel management practices can also lead to the

proliferation of invasive plants. Fuels management

almost universally involves removal of plant

biomass, which has the potential to increase nutrient

availability and thus increase the likelihood an area

will be invaded. Crews and equipment used for fuels

treatments also have the potential to spread invasive

plants. The window of opportunity for invasions

largely depends on how long it takes for native

vegetation to recover compared to the time invasive

plants become established and spread.

Once established, invasive plants can create new

and unexpected fire hazards that may be even more

difficult to manage. Even fuel treatment specifically

targeted to remove an invasive plant [e.g., salt cedar

(Tamarix spp), or giant reed (Arundo donax)] can

be followed by invasion of another species that, in

turn, could bring additional problems. Monitoring

for new invasive plants following the fuels

treatments may be necessary.

Recommendations for lessening the possibility that

a fuels management treatment may increase the

spread of invasive plants apply to the degree that

project goals can still be achieved (i.e., establishment

of a managed fuel zone). Evaluating what is required

to achieve fuels management goals requires analyses

beyond the scope of this handbook (i.e., fire behavior

modeling).

Plant propagules

If the locations of invasive plants are known prior

to planning a fuel treatment then those locations

can be avoided when possible. The effect of fuels

treatments on nutrient availability may be tempered

by whether or not potentially invasive plants are

nearby. For example, invasive plants may spread

after a fuel treatment where past disturbances left a

large number of invasives, but not where there were

few invasives prior to the treatment.

Unfortunately, invasive plants are often associated

with roads and trails which are commonly used as

anchor points for fuels treatments.

Section VI

Specific Operational Guidelines

for Major Fire Management

Activities

Reducing Propagule Availability

Ensure that vehicles, equipment, and personnel

do not spread invasive plants into the project

site.

Avoid incorporating pre-existing invasive plant

populations into managed fuel zones.

Implement a monitoring and control plan for

invasive plants after the fuels treatments are

applied.

Identify populations of invasive plants within the

project area and focus control efforts in those

areas.

Reducing Resource Availability

Minimize vegetation removal while still

accomplishing fuels management objectives.

   Target only the fuel layers that typically

carry fire (i.e., the understory and ladder

fuels in a forest).

   Selectively thin to reduce fuel continuity

rather than clear-cut.

   Construct fuel breaks no wider than

necessary to accomplish fuel reduction

objectives.

Consider revegetating with less flammable

vegetation following removal of flammable

vegetation.

Cover exposed soil with an organic mulch (i.e.,

hydromulch or chipped fuels).

Incorporate pre-existing fuel breaks, either man-made

or natural (i.e., areas of bare rock), into

managed fuel zones.

Fuels Management Treatments

Best management practices for minimizing the potential for plant invasions

17

Plant resources

Fuels treatments can involve the complete or

partial removal of plant biomass. The greater the

percentage of existing vegetation that is removed,

the greater the potential for spread of invasive

plants. For example, cover of invasive plants

often increases with the proportion of overstory

vegetation that is removed. Also, treatments that

involve both fuels thinning and burning can lead to

higher invasive plant cover than treatments that

include one or the other individually.

In some cases fuels management may include adding

plant cover of low flammability, commonly called

greenstripping. This technique involves the strategic

planting of low flammability plants to prevent or

reduce the rate of fire spread. It has been used

effectively by the Bureau of Land Management

in the Intermountain West. An added benefit of

greenstripping is its potential to reduce nutrient

availability for invasive plants such as cheatgrass

(Bromus tectorum). However, the benefits of adding

potentially aggressive greenstripping plants (which

are typically nonnative) to reduce fire spread and

compete with other undesirable species such as

cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) must always be

weighed against the potential negative effects

of the species (i.e., competition with natives or

other ecosystem impacts). More information on

greenstripping can be found at http://fresc.usgs.gov/

research.

Fire Suppression

Over time, invasive plants can pose even greater

management challenges than the fires themselves.

The recommendations below are designed to reduce

the likelihood for fire suppression activities to

create opportunities for invasive plants to become

established. These recommendations should only

be considered when there is no immediate threat to

human life and/or property.

Plant propagules

Fire suppression activities are more likely to

influence propagule availability than resource

availability. Fire-fighting crews and their equipment

can move invasive plants as they travel. Firefighters

set up small camps and their equipment largely

consists of personal belongings (i.e., boots, clothes,

sleeping bag, tent), Personal Protective Equipment

(PPE)(i.e., nomex gloves, helmet, goggles, fire pack,

fire shelter), back-pack sprayers, and hand tools

(i.e., shovels, pulaskies, axes, fire rakes, hoes). This

equipment can help spread invasive plants unless

they are cleaned prior to use at other locations. At

the very least, fire-fighters should clean tools, boots,

and tents prior to arriving and leaving a fire site.

Heavy equipment such as bulldozers probably

have the greatest potential for spreading invasives

because they often accumulate significant amounts

of soil and vegetation debris in their undercarriages.

When heavy equipment is used, it should either be

washed prior to transport or washed before it is

allowed to operate in new wildland areas.

Care is taken to limit burning near roads where no invasive plants are present. Photo by M. Weisenberger,

USFWS.

18

Aircraft are often used to transport and disperse

water, foam, or other fire retardant. These aircraft

may be helicopters with buckets, or fixed-wing

aircraft known as tankers or scoopers. There is

some concern that helicopters or scoopers could

carry invasive plants in the water they use. Aquatic

or riparian plants are most likely to be transported

in this manner, and because they are most likely

to be deposited into upland sites where most fires

occur, they would likely not become established.

A significant exception may be the potential for

establishment in springs and creeks that are often

common in upland areas. In general, the likelihood of

moving invasive plants long distances by this method

is probably low because water is typically obtained

from local sources near fires.

Plant resources

Fire suppression activities rarely lead to increased

resource availability, although there are a few

notable exceptions. For example, the use of

phosphate-based fire retardants may lead to

increased growth of invasive plants where phosphate

is a limiting nutrient. The construction of fuelbreaks

and some firelines, both by handcrews and by

heavy equipment, could lead to increased nutrient

availability due to reduced rates of consumption

from plants that are removed to clear the line.

Backing fires could have similar results for the same

reasons. More temporary control lines such as wet

lines or foam lines may be less likely to encourage

plant invasions because the existing vegetation is left

in place.

Emergency Stabilization, Rehabilitation, and

Restoration

Plant propagules

Seed mixes and application equipment are potential

sources for invasive plants. Seed mixes should be

inspected to ensure they are “weed free.” This

may require testing sub-samples to determine

their species composition before they are applied.

Application equipment also needs to be cleaned

before and after use, especially if equipment was

previously used in areas with known invasive plant

infestations.

Plant resources

Plants are mostly seeded after fires to stabilize

soils, but in some cases they are seeded to compete

with and suppress invasive plants. For example,

nonnative wheatgrasses (Agropyron spp.) have often

been planted to suppress the growth of cheatgrass in

the Intermountain West.

Jeff Olson at the Prescribed Fire Training Center. Photo by Greg Zoppetti, USFWS.

19

Reducing Propagule Availability

Ensure that vehicles, equipment, and personnel

do not spread invasive plants into burned areas.

   Coordinate with local personnel who know the

locations of invasive plants or who can quickly

survey sites for their presence.

   Include warnings to avoid known areas infested

with invasive plants during briefings at the

beginning of each shift.

   Avoid establishing staging areas (i.e., fire

camps, helibases) in areas dominated by

invasive plants.

   If populations of invasive plants occur within

or near staging areas, flag their perimeters so

that vehicle and foot traffic can avoid them.

   Inspect vehicles and equipment and wash them

if they have invasive plants or materials that

may contain invasive plants (i.e., mud) on them.

Inspections should be done when vehicles first

arrive at the fire, and periodically during the

fire as they return from working in the field.

Avoid the use of water from impoundments

infested with invasive plants.

Identify populations of invasive plants within the

burned area and focus postfire control efforts in

those areas.

For pre-planned wildland fire, environmental

assessments should at least document the

locations of major populations of invasive plants

within the proposed burn unit and evaluate the

potential for the burn prescription to increase

their dominance and spread. If the potential is

high, either remove those areas from the burn

unit or develop a postfire mitigation plan.

Implement a postfire monitoring and control

plan for invasive plants. Focus on populations of

invasive plants known to exist before the fire and

on areas of significant fire management activity

during the fire (i.e., fire camps, dozer lines).

Reducing Resource Availability

Minimize vegetation removal in the construction

of control lines.

   Use wet lines and foam lines as much as

possible.

   Use narrow handlines rather than broad dozer

lines or blacklines.

Minimize the use of nitrogen and phosphate-based

retardants, except where their use

eliminates the need for vegetation removal.

Tie control lines into pre-existing fuel breaks and

managed fuel zones.

During mop up, scatter organic matter back over

exposed soil where control lines were established.

Fire Suppression

Best management practices for minimizing the potential for plant invasions

Reducing Propagule Availability

Ensure that vehicles, equipment, and personnel do

not spread invasive plants into the project site.

Revegetate with native species, or nonnatives that

are not likely to become invasive.

Test seed mixes or other types of revegetation

materials to ensure that they do not contain

invasive plants as contaminants.

Implement a monitoring and re-treatment plan

for invasive plants after the initial treatments are

applied.

Reducing Resource Availability

Vegetate with fast-growing but non-invasive plants

to increase the uptake of resources that would

otherwise be utilized by invasive plants.

Cover exposed soil with an organic mulch (i.e.,

hydromulch or chipped fuels).

Focus efforts on reducing resource availability in

areas with sources of invasive plants.

Emergency Stabilization, Rehabilitation, and Restoration

Best management practices for minimizing the potential for plant invasions

20

Postfire Land-Use Regimes

Plant propagules

Any land-use activity increases the chance for

accidental introduction of invasive plant, so

reducing these activities can lessen the potential

for plant invasions. Invasive plants can be moved

by many ways, including people, stock animals,

pets, vehicles, equipment, and livestock feed just to

name a few. Thus, any person or anything traveling

into a recently burned area should be considered

a potential vector. It is much more cost effective to

prevent plant invasions than to manage them after

invasive plant populations are firmly established.

Plant resources

There are often significant demands to quickly

re-establish prevailing land-use activities following

fires. If these activities affect resource availability,

they may increase the likelihood an area will be

infested by invasive plants. For example, livestock

grazing is a common land-use on public lands,

and one of its main effects is the removal of plant

biomass. Biomass removal generally reduces levels

of competition and increases the availability of soil

nutrients, thus increasing the potential for invasive

plants to move into an area.

If it is possible to target grazing on invasive plants,

then it may help counteract the effects of increased

soil nutrients. However, the ability to control

what livestock eat makes focusing on undesirable

vegetation very difficult. In addition, repeated

grazing in focused areas over longer periods of

time can lead to other problems such as soil erosion

and loss of native species diversity, and even short

periods of deferred grazing may allow nonnatives to

rise to dominance.

Postfire Land-Use Regimes

Best management practices for minimizing the potential for plant invasions

Reducing Propagule Availability

Ensure that vehicles, equipment, and personnel

do not spread invasive plants into burned areas.

Consider temporary closure of public access to

burned areas to of invasive plants.

Consider using livestock grazing to target

invasive plants for short-term control.

Reducing Resource Availability

Minimize land uses that may reduce vigor of

resprouting of native plants (i.e., livestock

grazing).

Treating invasive plants with fire. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS

21

Monitoring management actions should focus on

responses of immediate interest, but should also

consider abiotic factors. In most cases, monitoring

is associated with the management action of interest

(i.e., the influence of fuels management on fuel

characteristics). Monitored responses will sometimes

extend to secondary effects (i.e., the influence of

fuels management on fuel characteristics, and

ultimately on fire behavior and fire regimes). At a

minimum, monitoring needs to determine whether

objectives of the management action have been

achieved.

Commonly used agency monitoring publications,

described in Table 4, outline vegetation monitoring

methodology, although none specifically address

invasive plants. Monitoring plans should include

the following elements: objectives, stratification,

controls, random sampling, data quality, and

statistical analysis. All of these topics, except for

controls, are discussed at length in the publications

listed in Table 4; only two monitoring publications

(USDI National Park Service 2003, Lutes et al. 2006)

cover all six monitoring elements.

Section VII

Effectiveness Monitoring

Table 4. Agency publications on monitoring.

Monitoring Publication Covers Fire Monitoring Associated Software

Fish and Wildlife Service

Fuel and Fire Effects Monitoring Guide Yes No

(USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 1999)

Bureau of Land Management No No

Sampling Vegetation Attributes

(Interagency Technical Reference 1999)

National Park Service

Fire Monitoring Handbook  Yes Yes

(USDI National Park Service 2003)

Forest Service

FireMon: Fire Effects Monitoring and Yes Yes

Inventory Protocol (Lutes et al. 2006)

Agricultural Research Service

Monitoring Manual for Grassland, No Yes

Shrubland, and Savanna Ecosystems

(Herrick et al. 2005a,b)

22

Asher, J.E., S. Dewey, C. Johnson and J. Olivarez.

2001. Reducing the spread of invasive exotic

plants following fire in western forests, deserts,

and grasslands (abstract). In: Galley KEM and

Wilson TP (Eds) Proceedings of the Invasive

Species Workshop: the Role of Fire in the Control

and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire Conference

2000: the First National Congress on Fire

Ecology, Prevention, and Management, pp 102-

103. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee,

FL.

Brooks, M.L. C.M. D’Antonio, D.M. Richardson,

J. Grace, J. J. Keeley, DiTomaso, R. Hobbs, M.

Pellant, and D. Pyke. 2004. Effects of invasive

alien plants on fire regimes. BioScience 54:677-

688.

Brooks, M.L. 2007. Effects of land management

practices on plant invasions in wildland areas.

Pages 147-162 in: W. Nentwig (ed.) Biological

Invasions. Ecological Studies, Vol. 193, Springer,

Heidelberg, Germany.

Champion, P.D., and J.S. Clayton. 2001. A weed

risk assessment model for aquatic weeds in

New Zealand. Pages 194-202 in R.H. Groves,

F.D. Panetta, and J.G. Virtue (eds.), Weed risk

assessment. CSIRO, Collingwood, Victoria,

Australia.

D’Antonio, C.M. and P.M. Vitousek. 1992. Biological

invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle,

and global change. Annual Review of Ecology and

Systematics. 23:63-87.

D’Antonio, C.M. 2000. Fire, plant invasions and

global changes. In: H. Mooney and R. Hobbs

(Eds). Invasive species in a changing world, pp.

65-94. Island Press, Covela.

DiTomaso, J.M., M.L. Brooks, E. B. Allen, R.

Minnich, P. M. Rice, and G. B. Kyser. 2006. Control

of invasive weeds with prescribed burning. Weed

Technology 20:535-548.

DiTomaso, J. M. and D. W. Johnson (Eds.). 2006.

The Use of Fire as a Tool for Controlling Invasive

Plants. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-01. California

Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. 56 pp.

Fox, A. M., D.R. Gordon, J.A. Dusky, L. Tyson,

and R.K. Stocker. 2001. IFAS assessment of

non-native plants in Florida’s natural areas.

SS-AGR-79. Agronomy Department, Florida

Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of

Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of

Florida. Available online at http://agronomy.ifas.

ufl.edu/docs/IFASAssessment2001.pdf

Galley, K. E. and Wilson. 2001. Proceedings of the

Invasive Species Workshop: The Role of Fire in

the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire

Conference 2000: The first National Congress on

Fire Ecology, Prevention and Management, San

Diego, CA, Misc. Pub No. 11.

Godwin, K., R. Sheley, and J. Clark. 2002. Integrated

Noxious Weed Management After Wildfires.

Montana State University Extension Service. 26

pp. Available online at www.montana.edu/wwwpb/

pubs/eb160.html.

Heffernan, K.E., P.P. Coulling, J.F. Townsend,

and C.J. Hutto. 2001. Ranking invasive exotic

plant species in Virginia. Natural Heritage

Technical Report 01-13. Virginia Department of

Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural

Heritage: Richmond, Virginia. 27 pages. Avalable

online at http://www.dcr.state.va.us/dnh/rankinv.

pdf

Herrick, J.E., J.W. Van Zee, K.M. Havstad, L.M.

Burkett, and W.G. Whitford. 2005a. Monitoring

Manual for Grassland, Shrubland, and Savanna

Ecosystems. Volume 1: quick start. USDA-ARS

Jornada Experimental Range. Las Cruces, NM.

36 p.

Herrick, J.E., J.W. Van Zee, K.M. Havstad, L.M.

Burkett, and W.G. Whitford. 2005b. Monitoring

Manual for Grassland, Shrubland, and Savanna

Ecosystems. Volume 2: design, supplementary

methods and interpretation. USDA-ARS Jornada

Experimental Range. Las Cruces, NM. 200 p.

Hiebert, R.D., and J. Stubbendieck. 1993. Handbook

for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management

and Control. U. S. Department of the Interior,

Natural Resources Report NPS/NRMWRO/

NRR-93/08. National Park Service, Natural

Resources Publication Office, Denver, CO.

Interagency Technical Reference. 1999. Sampling

Vegetation Attributes. BLM Technical Reference

1734-4. National Business Center, Denver, CO.

158 p

Keeley, J.E. 2003. Fire and invasive plants in

California ecosystems. Fire Management Today

63:18-19

Klinger, R.E. Underwood, P. Moore. 2006. The role

of environmental gradients in non-native plant

invasion into burnt areas of Yosemite National

Park, California. Diversity and Distributions 12:

139-156.

Section VIII

Bibliography

23

Lutes, D. C., R.E. Keane, J.F. Caratti, C.H. Key,

N.C. Benson, S. Sutherland, and L.J. Gangi.,

2006. FIREMON: Fire Effects Monitoring and

Inventory System. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-

164-CD. For Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station. 1 CD. 400 p.

Morse, L.E., J.R. Randall, N. Benton, R. Hiebert,

and S. Lu. 2004. An invasive species assessment

protocol: Evaluating non-native plants for their

impact on biodiversity. Version 1, NatureServe,

Arlington Virginia. Available online at http://www.

natureserve.org/getData/plantData.jsp.

Orr, R.L., S.D. Cohen, and R.L. Griffin. 1993.

Generic nonindigenous pest risk assessment

process. U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Washington, D.C.

 

Pyke, D., M. Brooks, C.M. D’Antonio. In prep.

Fire as a restoration tool: a life form decision

framework for predicting the control or

enhancement of plants using fire. Restoration

Ecology.

Thorp, J.R., and R. Lynch. 2000. The determination

of weeds of national significance. National Weeds

Strategy Executive Committee, Launceston,

Australia. Avalable online at http://www.weeds.

org.au/docs/WONS/

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Fuel and Fire

Effects Monitoring Guide. http://www.fws.gov/

fire/downloads/monitor.pdf. Accessed 9/22/06.

USDI National Park Service. 2003. Fire Monitoring

Handbook. Fire Management Program Center,

National Interagency Fire Center. Boise, ID.

274 p.

Virtue, J.G., R. H. Groves, and F.D. Panetta. 2001.

Towards a system to determine the national

significance of weeds in Australia. Pages 124-152

in R.H. Grove, F.D. Panetta, and J.G. Virtue,

eds., Weed risk assessment. CSIRO, Collingwood,

Victoria, Australia.

Warner, P.J., C.C. Bossard, M.L. Brooks,

J.M. DiTomaso, J.A. Hall, A. Howald, D.W.

Johnson, J.M. Randall, C.L. Roye, M.M.

Ryan, and A.E. Stanton. 2003. Criteria for

Categorizing Invasive Non-Native Plants that

Threaten Wildlands. California Exotic Pest Plant

Council and Southwest Vegetation Management

Association. 24 pp. (http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/

filelibrary/5319/6657.doc).

Weiss, J., and D. McLaren. 1999. Invasive

Assessment of Victoria’s State Prohibited,

Priority and Regional Priority Weeds. Keith

Turnbull Research Institute, Agriculture Victoria,

Frankston, Victoria, Australia. 16 pp.

Wirth, Troy A., and Pyke, David A. 2007, Monitoring

post-fire vegetation rehabilitation projects-A

common approach for non-forested ecosystems:

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations

Report 2006-5048, 36 pp.

Zouhar, K., J. Kapler Smith, S. Sutherland, and

M. L. Brooks. (eds.) 2008. Wildland fire in

ecosystems: fire and nonnative invasive plants.

Gen.Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-volume 6. Ogden,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

355 pp.

Using drip torches to apply fire to buffelgrass on the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife

Refuge. Photo by South Texas Fire District, USFWS.

24

Federal Mandates

The following is a chronological list of federal laws,

executive orders and management plans pertaining

to invasive plant control with fire management

activities on federal lands. Federal Acts may be

found on-line at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/

search.html; or Public Laws (since 1994) at: http://

www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/search.html.

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration

Act, as amended

This act establishes the Fish and Wildlife Refuge

System. This act requires the agency to administer

lands to provide for the conservation of fish,

wildlife, plants and their habitats and to ensure that

biological integrity and diversity are maintained.

National Environmental Policy Act (1970)

This act requires government agencies to consider

the environmental effects of their actions through

the preparation of appropriate NEPA documents

(i.e., EAS, EA or EIS). Effects of nonnative species,

if harmful to the environment, would be included

in NEPA analysis. In emergency situations, NEPA

procedures that would normally be required may

be negotiated with the Council of Environmental

Quality.

Endangered Species Act (1973)

This Act protects federally listed Threatened and

Endangered species. When nonnative invasive

species threaten a Threatened or Endangered

species, this Act could be used to justify treatment

of the infestation.

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (1976)

This act establishes public land policy and

guidelines for its administration and to provide for

the management, protection, development, and

enhancement of public lands.

Lacey Act (1981)

Under this Act it is unlawful to import, export,

transport, buy or sell fish, wildlife and plants taken

or possessed in violation of federal, state or tribal

laws.

Appendix A.

Laws, Policies And Planning Documents

Guiding the Management of Invasive

Plants and Fire

Using fire as a beneficial tool to treat invasive plants. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS

25

Hawaii Tropical Forest Recovery Act (1992)

This Act establishes the Hawaii Tropical Forest

Recovery Task Force to draft a plan for rejuvenating

Hawaii’s tropical forests.

Executive Order 13112 (1999)

This Order defines invasive species as an alien

species whose introduction does or is likely to cause

economic or environmental harm or harm to human

health. It directs all federal agencies to address

invasive species concerns and refrain from actions

that are likely to increase invasive species problems.

This Order also established the National Invasive

Species Council and the development of a National

Invasive Species Management Plan to better

coordinate efforts among federal agencies.

Plant Protection Act (2000)

This Act replaced many previous invasive plant

species acts including the Federal Noxious Weed

Act, the Plant Quarantine Act, the Federal Plant

Pest Act and other related statutes and primarily

applies to USDA, but authorizes APHIS to take both

emergency and extraordinary actions to address

incursions of noxious weeds which can be regulated

on federal lands.

Noxious Weed Control and Eradication Act (2004)

This Act is an amendment to the Plant Protection

Act above and provides for the provision of

funds through grants and agreements to weed

management entities for the control and eradication

of noxious weeds.

National Invasive Species Council Management

Plan (2008)

The National Invasive Species Council was

established by Executive Order 13112. One of its

directives under the EO is to prepare a management

plan for invasive species that will provide guidance

for all federal agencies over a four year period.

Department of Interior Policy

The Departmental Manual (DM) has several policies

addressing invasive species management issues. The

following is numerically ordered list of DM policies

that relate directly or indirectly to fire and invasive

species management activities. DM policies may be

found on-line at: http://elips.doi.gov/app_dm/index.

cfm?fuseaction=home

516 DM 2 - Initiating the NEPA Process (2005)

This purpose of this Chapter is to provide

instructions for implementing CEQ regulations that

pertain to initiating the NEPA process. Appendix

2.12. states that the introduction of invasive species

is an extraordinary circumstance to a Categorical

Exclusion according to the Federal Noxious Weed

Control Act and Executive Order 13112.

   Appendix 1 provides a list of management actions

that are DOI Categorical Exclusions pursuant

to 516 DM 2.3(A). Included in these actions

are: 1.6 - non-destructive inventory, research

and monitoring activities, 1.12 - Hazardous

fuels reduction activities using prescribed fire

not to exceed 4,500 acres, and 1.13 - Post-fire

rehabilitation activities not to exceed 4,200 acres.

   Appendix 2 lists Extraordinary Circumstances

for some actions covered under Categorical

Exclusions. Relevant actions include: 2.3 - Have

highly controversial environmental effects, 2.4 -

Involve unknown environmental risks, and 2.12

- Contribute to the introduction or spread of non-native

invasive species.

516 DM 8 - Managing the NEPA Process -

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2004)

This Chapter provides supplementary requirements

for implementing provisions of 516 DM 1 through

6 within the Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service. Section 8.5 lists important Categorical

Exclusions for FWS activities. Relevant Categorical

Exclusions that may cover some fire and invasives

management actions include:

   8.5.B(1): Research, inventory, and information

collection activities.

   8.5.B(3): The construction... structures and

improvements for the restoration of wetland,

riparian, instream, or native habitats, which result

in no or only minor changes in the use of the

affected local area.

   8.5B(4): The use of prescribed burning for habitat

improvement purposes.

   8.5B(5): Fire management activities, including

prevention and restoration measures.

   8.5B(6): The reintroduction or supplementation

(e.g., stocking) of native, formerly native, or

established species into suitable habitat within

their historic or established range.

517 DM 1 Integrated Pest Management Policy

(2007)

This policy updates the Integrated Pest

Management (IPM) policy to make it consistent

with current laws, contemporary science, and other

authorities. The revised policy addresses the IPM

process and pest management tools, including

pesticides and biological control agents.

522 DM Implementation of Adaptive

Management Policy (2008)

This Chapter provides guidance to help Agencies

incorporate adaptive management strategies

into their land and resource management

decisions. Section 1.5 (B) requires offices to conduct

appropriate monitoring to determine resource status

and evaluate progress toward achieving objectives.

606 DM 2 Soil and Moisture Conservation Policy

(1971)

This policy affirms that the purpose of the soil

conservation program is to restore and maintain

soil properties for optimal conditions. Both burning

26

and weed control are listed as an appropriate

soil and moisture conservation activities for site

improvement (Section 2.2.B.1).

609 DM 1 Weed Control Program Policy (1995)

This policy defines undesirable plants/weeds as

noxious when they interfere with man’s activities

or welfare. It is DOI policy to control undesirable

plants on lands under its jurisdiction. Further,

programs within DOI for the control of undesirable

plants will incorporate integrated pest management

practices. DOI Bureaus will coordinate their

integrated pest management activities with other

federal and non-federal agencies where possible.

At the Bureau level, each Bureau is responsible for

planning, funding, implementing, and overseeing

integrated pest management programs. This policy

establishes the DOI weed control committee with

representatives from each bureau and is charged

with overall interdisciplinary program development.

620 DM 2 Burned Area Rehabilitation Policy

(2004)

This chapter provides the Departmental Policy for

the Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation

on Bureau lands and Indian Trust Lands following

wildland fires. Specifically, Section 3.8E states that

exotic species introductions as a part of seeding in

burned areas are restricted with exceptions from

the Secretary of the Interior. Section 3.2.W. states

that Executive Order 13112 is an authority for

conducting BAER activities. Other references to the

prevention of invasive species are found throughout

this Chapter.

Fish and Wildlife Service Policy

There are many citations throughout the Fish and

Wildlife Service Manual (FW), Administrative

Manual (AM) and Refuge Manual (RM) that

describe FWS policy as it relates to invasive species.

The following is a list of FWS and NWRS policies

directly or indirectly related to invasive species and

fire management activities. FWS policies may be

found on-line at: http://www.fws.gov/policy/manuals/.

Environment 30 AM 12 Pest Management Policy

and Responsibilities

This policy affirms that the FWS will use

integrated pest management in its planning of pest

management actions. Section 12.5 (B) lists burning

as a type of cultural control that can be used to

reduce pest populations.

052 FW 4 Planning and Management

This policy states that the ecosystem approach

concept to fish and wildlife management will be

implemented. Section 1.8.B.2.a.vii. states that

goals should include exotic species concepts when

developing plans.

Fire can be an effective tool to restore habitat on a landscape scale. Photo by M. Weisenberger, USFWS.

27

095 FW 3 Emergency Operations

This policy involves fire management activities.

Section 3.9.C.1.a. describes fire damage restoration

to include the use of herbicides, and other site

preparation activities to reduce weed competition

prior to seeding burned areas for restoration.

Section 3.9.B.2.E states that the FWS will minimize

the establishment of nonnative species in BAER

activities to prevent unacceptable degradation

to burned areas, Section 3.D.1.C. states that

fuels management projects will minimize the

establishment of invasive species.

601 FW 1 National Wildlife Refuge System

Mission and Goals and Refuge Purposes

This policy reiterates that the overarching goal of

the NWRS is to conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife,

and plants and their habitats by focusing on native

species.

601 FW 3 Biological Integrity, Diversity and

Environmental Health

This policy involves maintaining and restoring the

biological integrity, diversity and environmental

health of NWRs. Section 3.10.B3 states that the

FWS strives to minimize the spread of invasive

species; Section 3.11.B. states that the FWS should

use physical structures and chemical applications

to manage for biological diversity and eliminate

invasive species; Section 3.14.F. states that the

FWS supports the reintroduction of extirpated

native species to control invasive species if needed;

Section 3.16.A. states invasive species should not

be introduced, populations should be detected and

controlled through integrated pest management

strategies including mechanical, chemical, biological,

and cultural control methods.

602 FW 3 Exhibit 2 Comprehensive Conservation

Planning

This exhibit describes the statutes that should be

considered in the CCP process and identifies the

Noxious Weed Act as a mandate.

603 FW 1 Appropriate Refuge Uses

This policy states that invasive species control is

an accepted refuge management activity that is

included in appropriate refuge uses (Section 1.2.B).

603 FW 2 Compatibility

This policy states that refuge management activity

such as invasive species control does not require a

compatibility determination (Section 2.10.A).

620 FW 1 Habitat Management Plans

This policy describes guiding principles for the

development of habitat management plans on

refuges. Section 1.4.E defines the term invasive

species for habitat management plans; Section 1.7G

describes guiding principles which should include

invasive species management. Section 1.7.G. also

states that an integrated pest management plan will

be used to describe activities related to the control of

invasive species

640 FW 1 Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program

This chapter describes the implementation of the

Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program. Section

1.13.I on Service fire management policy recognizes

that prescribed fire is an important and acceptable

tool to remove exotic species and gives guidelines for

using Partners funding for prescribed burning.

7 RM 8 Exotic Species Introduction and

Management

This policy affirms that the NWRS exists for the

protection and management of plants and animals

native to the United States. It outlines the special

circumstances under which the continued existence

of nonnative plants or animals may be permitted.

In particular, it discusses the requirements for

releasing biocontrols onto a refuge.

7 RM 14 Pest Control

Although this policy deals largely with the use of

pesticides on refuges, it does affirm that one of

the objectives of pest management activities on

refuges is to control exotic species and allow normal

populations of native species to exist.

The National Strategy for Management of

Invasive Species

National Wildlife Refuge System (2003)

This document was developed by a Fulfilling the

Promise Team with the support of the regional

refuge chiefs. It outlines a comprehensive strategy

for dealing with the critical problem of invasive

species on National Wildlife Refuges. The plan

was developed in the context of Executive Order

13112 and the National Invasive Species Council

management plan. A copy of this strategy may be

found on-line at: http://www.fws.gov/invasives/pdfs/

NationalStrategyFinalRevised05-04.pdf

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

http://www.fws.gov

March 2009