The role of forest fire severity on vegetation recovery after 18 years. Implications for forest management of Quercus suber L. in Iberian Peninsula Marcos Francos a, ⁎, Xavier Úbeda a , Joan Tort a , Josep María Panareda a , Artemio Cerdà b,c a GRAM (Grup de Recerca Ambiental Mediterrània), Department of Geography, Faculty of Geography and History, University of Barcelona, Montalegre 6, 08001 Barcelona, Spain b SEDER (Soil Erosion and Degradation Research Group), Department of Geography, University of València, Blasco Ibáñez 28, 46010 Valencia, Spain c Soil Physics and Land Management Group, Wageningen University, Droevendaalsesteeg 4, 6708PB Wageningen, Netherlands abstract article info Article history: Received 25 April 2016 Received in revised form 16 June 2016 Accepted 1 July 2016 Available online 17 August 2016 Wildfires are a widespread phenomenon in Mediterranean environments. Wildfires result in different fire sever- ities, and then in contrasting plant cover and floristic composition. This paper analyses the recovery of the vege- tation eighteen years after a wildfire in Catalonia. The Pinus pinaster ssp. forest was affected by three different severities in July 1994, and studied the spring of 1995 and again in 2008. After eighteen years (2012), our re- search found that burnt sites constitute a dense forest with a broad variety of species, including many young pines, shrubs and herbaceous plants, but that the risk of fire remains very high, due to the large quantity of fuel and the flammability of the species. The management of the post-fire is critical when high severity fires take places, and it is recommended that high-severity fires must be avoided for a sustainable forest management. We recommend that once the timber (Pinus plantations) production is not profitable, Quercus suber L. and Pinus pinaster ssp. forest should be promoted, and pine plantations avoided. © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Pinus pinaster ssp. Quercus suber L. Forest abandonment Forest management Plant species inventory 1. Introduction Long-term research studies are helpful in scientific research (Dixon-Coppage et al., 2005; Torn et al., 2015; Novara et al., 2016; Shi et al., 2016; van der Meij et al., 2016), to develop sustainable forest man- agement strategies (Úbeda et al., 2006; Amores et al., 2008) and for veg- etation (Beyene, 2015; Tarhouni et al., 2016) and soil (Brevik and Fenton, 2012; Brevik et al., 2015; Laudicina et al., 2015) recovery. These kinds of studies inform us of the post fire vegetation dynamics (Muños-Rojas et al., 2016) and their impact on ecosystem recovery after disturbances (Lasanta and Cerdà, 2005; Srinivasarao et al., 2014; Shaw et al., 2016). As a long-term strategy in burnt areas, some authors claim that the optimum solution is to not act and to let the vegetation regrow naturally (Vallejo et al., 1996). Others, including Igarashi and Kiyono (2008) and Zhang et al. (2010), argue that management in- creases species diversity and so it is necessary to thin the tree layer and to ensure that the accumulation of plant debris does not impede seed germination and plant growth. Various modes of action might therefore be taken after a forest fire. Vallejo et al. (1996) discusses the possible outcomes of replanting new species, replanting the same spe- cies, and not taking any action at all. Santana et al. (2011) reported that the frequency of treatment had a negative impact on forest structural diversity and uniformity and was associated with slower for- est regeneration. However, it should be stressed that all forestry man- agement practices implemented in the wake of a fire are highly dependent on the environmental conditions (Vieira et al., 2012), al- though it is widely recognized that in all cases there is a lack of long- term measurements that will help find the right management. Therefore, the key point to discuss is whether or not to act, and if so, how to act and when to take action after a forest fire or during the post- fire vegetation recovery (Alfaro-Sánchez et al., 2014). In Catalonia, the dead trees used to be removed from the forest one year after the fire. Úbeda (1998) noted an increase in erosion as a consequence of the tree removal and there is a loss in soil quality due to the removal of the trunks (Mataix-Solera et al., 2015). Madrigal et al. (2011) recom- mend extracting the burnt wood two months after the fire, while ensur- ing dissemination and soil protection by needles, because, as discussed: “the urgency of the actions may cause more damage than good”. They also consider that delaying the removal of burnt wood should only occur in areas where regeneration is likely to be successful. Under Med- iterranean climatic conditions, there is a clear impact from any treat- ment done after the forest fire due to the bare soil, the crust development, the shallow and heterogeneous cover of ash and the lack of vegetation… that results in the highest erosion and runoff rates during the first year after the fire (Cerdà, 1998; Pereira et al., 2015). This is why there is a need to act soon after the fire with forestation, scarification, log barriers, aerial seeding and hydromulch (Fernández et al., 2011; Robichaud et al., 2013), although is widely accepted that Global and Planetary Change 145 (2016) 11–16 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: marcosfrancos91@gmail.com (M. Francos). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.07.016 0921-8181/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Global and Planetary Change journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gloplacha