Logotipo do repositório
 

Publicação:
The year 2017: Megafires and management in the cerrado

dc.contributor.authorFidelis, Alessandra [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorAlvarado, Swanni T. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBarradas, Ana Carolina S.
dc.contributor.authorPivello, Vânia R.
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionInstituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-12T00:54:09Z
dc.date.available2020-12-12T00:54:09Z
dc.date.issued2018-12-01
dc.description.abstractThe year 2017 was a megafire year, when huge areas burned on different continents. In Brazil, a great extension of the Cerrado burned, raising once more the discussion about the “zero-fire” policy. Indeed, most protected areas of the Cerrado adopted a policy of fire exclusion and prevention, leading to periodic megafire events. Last year, 78% of the Chapada dos Veadeiros National Park burned at the end of the dry season, attracting media attention. Furthermore, 85% of the Reserva Natural Serra do Tombador burned as a result of a large accumulation of fuel caused by the zero-fire policy. In 2014, some protected areas started to implement the Integrate Fire Management (IFM) strategy. During 2017, in contrast to other protected areas, the Estação Ecológica Serra Geral do Tocantins experienced no megafire events, suggesting that a few years of IFM implementation led to changes in its fire regime. Therefore, we intended here to compare the total burned area and number of fire scars between the protected areas where IFM was implemented and those where fire exclusion is the adopted policy. The use of fire as a management tool aimed at wildfire prevention and biodiversity preservation should be reconsidered by local managers and environmental authorities for most Cerrado protected areas, especially those where open savanna physiognomies prevail. Changing the paradigm is a hard task, but last year’s events showed the zero-fire policy would bring more damage than benefits to Cerrado protected areas.en
dc.description.affiliationLab of Vegetation Ecology Instituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Avenida 24-A 1515
dc.description.affiliationEcosystem Dynamics Observatory Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Avenida 24-A 1515
dc.description.affiliationEstação Ecológica Serra Geral do Tocantins Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio), Avenida Beira Rio, Qd. 02, 6
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Ecology Instituto de Biociências Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão, Travessa 14, 321
dc.description.affiliationUnespLab of Vegetation Ecology Instituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Avenida 24-A 1515
dc.description.affiliationUnespEcosystem Dynamics Observatory Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Avenida 24-A 1515
dc.format.extent1-11
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3390/fire1030049
dc.identifier.citationFire, v. 1, n. 3, p. 1-11, 2018.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/fire1030049
dc.identifier.issn2571-6255
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85065837743
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/197922
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofFire
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAltered fire regime
dc.subjectFire incidence
dc.subjectFire risk
dc.subjectFuel load
dc.subjectIntegrated Fire Management
dc.subjectMegafires
dc.subjectProtected areas
dc.subjectTropical savanna
dc.titleThe year 2017: Megafires and management in the cerradoen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas, Rio Claropt

Arquivos