>>1877118That's just simply not the case anon.
Plantation forestry "typically" has much lower planting densities and trees per acre than naturally regenerated stands. It really depends what you mean by "extreme" densities since we are not as familiar with PNW forestry down here. For example, on "average" an artificially regenerated loblolly pine stand will have a 6x10 spacing of 600-900 TPA, with the average being ~700 TPA (
http://dendro.cnre.vt.edu/dendrology/USDAFSSilvics/34.pdf) I know this publication lists it as different, but understand that the more common spacing during the time of its publication was either 8x8 or 10x10, most landowners plant on a 6x10 these days. Naturally regenerated loblolly pine stands, without accounting for fluctuations in viable seed production from suboptimal to mast years, will have a TPA of several thousand. This study (
https://www.srs.fs.fed.us/pubs/ja/ja_cain008.pdf) found that number of stems per acre (I converted from stems/ha) was 2833/ac. This is very different from the planted TPA of 700. Also this is artificially regenerated TPA at time of establishment, which doesn't even account for the reduction in TPA as the stand matures from natural mortality and thinnings. So fire susceptibility as a function of density is not really an issue in plantation forestry in the southeast.
Pic related is a burn I did for a landowner where he had already successfully burned this stand the year prior at age 5, we burned it in the late winter/early spring (warm winters here) at age 6 on a cooler day with high winds and fine fuel moisture slightly higher than I would have liked. We burned it with a spotfire grid and it responded really well later in the season. Let me be clear though, that fire was fucking hot and was ripping through that sumbitch.
