Abstract
Slope stabilization treatments like mulching are commonly used to reduce runoff and erosion after high severity wildfires. Agricultural straw is the most common material although it is susceptible to be blown away by the wind or introduce non-native plants. Although these limitations do not apply to wood-based mulch, this material has not been widely tested in the field. We compared the efficacy of two types of mulch for reducing soil erosion and evaluated its effects on vegetation recovery during the first two years after wildfire. The treatments were: straw helimuching (3.0–3.5 Mg ha−1), ground-applied wood strand mulching (11 Mg ha−1) and control (no mulch). During the first year after wildfire, the mean sediment yield in the control plots was 11 Mg ha−1. In this period, the respective mean sediment yields in the wood strand mulched plots were significantly lower than in the control plots (1.6 Mg ha−1) but higher than in the straw mulched plots (0.5 Mg ha−1). Soil erosion decreased during the second year after wildfire in all cases, while vegetation cover and soil penetration resistance and soil shear strength increased. Neither of the mulching treatments significantly affected the recovery of vegetation cover or species composition. The results indicate the feasibility of wood strand mulch to effectively reduce soil erosion after the fire, with no detrimental effects on vegetation recovery. However, the amount of material required to ensure the protection of the soil, together with difficulties to be applied, may limit its widespread use as a post-fire soil stabilization option.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call