Forecasting the Frequency and Magnitude of Postfire Debris Flows Across Southern California

37Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Southern California has a long history of damaging debris flows after wildfire. Despite recurrent loss, forecasts of the frequency and magnitude of postfire debris flows are not available for the region like they are for earthquakes. Instead, debris flow hazards are typically assessed in a reactive manner after wildfires. Such assessments are crucial for evaluating debris flow risk by postfire emergency response teams; however, time between the fire and first rainstorm is often insufficient to fully develop and implement effective emergency response plans like those in place for earthquakes. Here, we use both historical distributions of fire and precipitation frequency and empirical models of postfire debris flow likelihood and volume to map the expected frequency and magnitude of postfire debris flows across southern California. We find that at least small debris flows can be expected almost every year, while major debris flows capable of damaging 40 or more structures have a recurrence interval between 10 and 13 years, a return interval that is comparable to a magnitude 6.7 earthquake. A sensitivity analysis to possible future changes in current fire and precipitation regimes indicates that debris flow activity in southern California is more sensitive to increases in precipitation intensity than increases in fire frequency and severity. Projected increases in rainfall intensity of 18% result in an overall 110% increase in the probability of major debris flows. Our results, in combination with an assessment of exposure, can be used to prioritize watersheds for further analysis and possible prefire mitigation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kean, J. W., & Staley, D. M. (2021). Forecasting the Frequency and Magnitude of Postfire Debris Flows Across Southern California. Earth’s Future, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EF001735

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free