IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/104232.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Vegetation Cover and Structure Loss in Four Northern California Wildfires: Butte, Tubbs, Carr, and Camp

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, James

Abstract

This study examines the effect of vegetation cover near structures on the loss rate for single family residences (SFR’s) in four recent northern California wildfires: the Butte fire (September, 2015), the Tubbs fire (October, 2017) , the Carr fire (July, 2018) , and the Camp fire (November, 2018). In total, 19,508 destroyed and 5,208 surviving SFR’s were included in the study. The proportion of pre-fire vegetation cover within 25 meters of a central point representing each structure was estimated using high-resolution infrared aereal imagery. For each fire, structures were grouped into 10 vegetation cover classes, based on the proportion of cover, and loss rates were calculated by class. Linear regression was applied to estimate the effect of vegetation cover on loss rates. Loss rates were found to increase in proportion to vegetation cover in three of the four fires. For the two fires in the Sierra Nevada foothills (Butte and Camp) the slope of the loss rate regression line was similar, around 0.9. That is, the probability of loss increased by 0.9 % for every 1% increase in vegetation cover in the 25-meter zone. For the Carr fire, the loss rate slope coefficient was estimated to be 0.4, about half of the value for the Sierra fires. Structure loss rates in the Tubbs fire were uncorrelated with vegetation cover. The effects of wind speed, vegetation type, and housing density on loss rates were also examined. Loss rate regression lines tended to shift upward in concert with the maximum wind speeds encountered on each fire. In the case of the Tubbs fire, high winds appeared to completely negate the influence of vegetation cover on loss rates. Structures located in conifer vegetation types had a higher loss rate when compared to those located in hardwood types for the Sierra fires, but that pattern did not hold for the Tubbs or Carr fires, located in more coastal mountain ranges. Loss rates did not differ significantly by Wildland Urban Interface zones as mapped by the University of Wisconsin’s SILVIS lab.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, James, 2020. "Vegetation Cover and Structure Loss in Four Northern California Wildfires: Butte, Tubbs, Carr, and Camp," MPRA Paper 104232, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:104232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/104232/1/MPRA_paper_104232.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmidt, James, 2020. "The Butte Fire: A Case Study in Using LIDAR Measures of Pre-Fire Vegetation to Estimate Structure Loss Rates," MPRA Paper 99699, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schmidt, James, 2022. "The Effects of Vegetation, Structure Density, and Wind on Structure Loss Rates in Recent Northern California Wildfires," MPRA Paper 112191, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Wildfire; Structure loss; Vegetation; Defensible Space; Butte Fire; Tubbs Fire; Carr Fire; Camp Fire; California; Wind Speed; Lifeform; Conifer; Hardwood; Shrub; WUI; Wildland Urban Interface; CALFIRE; NDVI; NAIP; LIDAR; Infrared; Housing Density; Linear Regression; Vegetation Cover; Loss Rate; Single Family Residence; Vegetation Reduction; Lifeform; FVEG; FRAP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H8 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:104232. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.