Remove burned trees

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Study locations

Key messages

  • One replicated, controlled study in Israel1 found that removing burned trees increased total plant species richness. One replicated, controlled study in Spain2 found that removal increased the cover and species richness of some plant species.


About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, controlled study in 1989-1993 in Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis forest in Israel (Ne'eman, Lahav & Izhaki 1995) found that clearing burned trees increased plant species richness. The number of species was higher in cleared than untreated plots (cleared: 196; twigs remaining: 192; untreated: 185/0.49 ha plot). Data were collected in 1993 in five plots (0.49 ha) of each of three treatments: cleared (burned trees cut down, trunks and smaller twigs removed), twigs (smaller twigs left) and control (untreated). Plots were all in an area totally burnt down in September 1989. Treatments were carried out in September-November 1990.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, controlled study in 1991-1994 in maritime pine Pinus pinaster woodland in Spain (Pérez & Moreno 1998) found that removing burned trees increased the cover and species richness of legumes but not of all herbaceous plants, or of the dominant shrub gum rockrose Cistus ladanifer. Legume cover (removed: 7-29%; control: 3-26%) and species richness (removed: 3-6; control: 2-5/plot) were higher in removal plots. There were no differences between treatments for: total herbaceous cover (removed: 8-47%; control: 3-49%), species richness (removed: 5-16; control: 6-14), gum rockrose cover (removed: 8%-25%; control: 10%-46%) and gum rockrose density (removed: 1-5; control: 5-11/m2). Data were collected in 12 removal plots (burned trees removed after fire) and 12 control plots (trees not removed, 5 × 5 m). Treatments were three years after the entire study site was burned by wildfire fire in 1991.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Agra, H., Schowanek, S., Carmel, Y., Smith, R.K. & Ne’eman, G. (2020) Forest Conservation. Pages 323-366 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Forest Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Forest Conservation
Forest Conservation

Forest Conservation - Published 2016

Forest synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust