Fire frequency is relatively more important than fire size — a reply to Russell-Smith et al

We thank Russell-Smith et al. (this volume) for their critical reflection on our study (Griffiths et al., 2015). Their key argument is that the experimental compartments at Kapalga thatwe used in the population viability analysis were unrepresentative in relation to fire size and intensity across the mesic savannas of northern Australia. Specifically, they recommend the results of our study be “interpreted carefully” because the experimental design at Kapalga resulted in higher intensity fires and compartments were larger than average fires in the region. This is a legitimate point, but it is important to clarify the broader context in which our modelling might be applied.