Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34248273›Full record

ArticleHydrological processes2021

Scientists' warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply.

François-Nicolas Robinne, Dennis W Hallema, Kevin D Bladon, Mike D Flannigan, Gabrielle Boisramé, Christian M Bréthaut, Stefan H Doerr, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Louise A Gallagher, Amanda K Hohner and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hydrological processes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Priority research directions for wildfire science: views from a historically fire-prone and an emerging fire-prone country.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Climate and nature emergency: From scientists' warnings to sufficient action.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

François-Nicolas RobinneCanadian Partnership for Wildland Fire Science University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0554-7668
Dennis W HallemaDepartment of Forestry and Environmental Resources North Carolina State University Raleigh North Carolina USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1384-5435
Kevin D BladonDepartment of Forest Engineering, Resources and Management Oregon State University Corvallis Oregon USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4182-6883
Mike D FlanniganCanadian Partnership for Wildland Fire Science University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada.
Gabrielle BoisraméDivision of Hydrologic Sciences Desert Research Institute Las Vegas Nevada USA.
Christian M BréthautInstitute for Environmental Sciences University of Geneva Geneva Switzerland.
Stefan H DoerrGeography and Biosciences Departments, College of Science Swansea University Swansea UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8700-9002
Giuliano Di BaldassarreDepartment of Earth Sciences Uppsala University Uppsala Sweden.
Louise A GallagherUNEP/GRID-Geneva Geneva Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4697-2246
Amanda K HohnerDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering Washington State University Pullman Washington USA.
Stuart J KhanSchool of Civil & Environmental Engineering University of New South Wales Kensington New South Wales Australia.
Alicia M KinoshitaDepartment of Civil, Construction, & Environmental Engineering San Diego State University San Diego California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2283-4490
Rua MordecaiSouth Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative United States Fish and Wildlife Service Raleigh North Carolina USA.
João Pedro NunesDepartment of Environmental Sciences Wageningen University Wageningen the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0164-249X
Petter NymanAlluvium Consulting Australia Cremorne Victoria Australia.
Cristina SantínGeography and Biosciences Departments, College of Science Swansea University Swansea UK.
Gary SheridanSchool of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Cathelijne R StoofDepartment of Environmental Sciences Wageningen University Wageningen the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0198-9215
Matthew P ThompsonRocky Mountain Research Station, Human Dimensions USDA Forest Service Fort Collins Colorado USA.
James M WaddingtonSchool of Earth, Environment & Society McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.
Yu WeiDepartment of Forest and Rangeland Stewardship Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

2020 is the year of wildfire records. California experienced its three largest fires early in its fire season. The Pantanal, the largest wetland on the planet, burned over 20% of its surface. More than 18 million hectares of forest and bushland burned during the 2019-2020 fire season in Australia, killing 33 people, destroying nearly 2500 homes, and endangering many endemic species. The direct cost of damages is being counted in dozens of billion dollars, but the indirect costs on water-related ecosystem services and benefits could be equally expensive, with impacts lasting for decades. In Australia, the extreme precipitation ("200 mm day -1 in several location") that interrupted the catastrophic wildfire season triggered a series of watershed effects from headwaters to areas downstream. The increased runoff and erosion from burned areas disrupted water supplies in several locations. These post-fire watershed hazards via source water contamination, flash floods, and mudslides can represent substantial, systemic long-term risks to drinking water production, aquatic life, and socio-economic activity. Scenarios similar to the recent event in Australia are now predicted to unfold in the Western USA. This is a new reality that societies will have to live with as uncharted fire activity, water crises, and widespread human footprint collide all-around of the world. Therefore, we advocate for a more proactive approach to wildfire-watershed risk governance in an effort to advance and protect water security. We also argue that there is no easy solution to reducing this risk and that investments in both green (i.e., natural) and grey (i.e., built) infrastructure will be necessary. Further, we propose strategies to combine modern data analytics with existing tools for use by water and land managers worldwide to leverage several decades worth of data and knowledge on post-fire hydrology.

Indexed as

climate changeextreme eventsfire regime restorationforest ecosystem servicesrisk governancesocio‐hydrologywater securitywatershed protection

Identifiers

PMID34248273
PMCPMC8251805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.