Frequent, low-intensity fires were a common feature of Sierran forest ecosystems, but suppression policies over the past century have left many forests at risk for catastrophic wildfires. Recent policies highlight the use of prescribed burning or harvesting as fire risk reduction tools, but few studies have investigated the impacts of these management practices on the leaf litter fauna of Sierran forests. This study examines how three fire and 'fire surrogate' treatments, prescribed burning, overstory thinning with understory mastication, and combined thinning and burning, impact diversity and abundance of Coleoptera and other leaf litter arthropods. Pitfall trapping was used to collect litter arthropods before and immediately after treatments in replicated forest compartments. The diverse Coleoptera assemblage was dominated by only a few common species, with many rare species represented by only one or two individuals. Rank-abundance diagrams indicated that much of the change in the beetle assemblage due to the treatments was a result of changes in the numbers of rare species. Indicator species analysis showed several species closely allied with the treated compartments, but few with the untreated controls. Both NMS and CCA ordination show considerable change in overall assemblage structure on compartments treated with fire, but less change in the thinned compartments. Coleoptera species richness was slightly higher in burned compartments. Some common beetle species, families of beetles, and other common groups such as ants and spiders showed changes in abundance due to the treatments, but the changes were taxon-specific and showed no general pattern. Overall impacts of the treatments appear to be moderate, and the increased habitat heterogeneity at the compartment level may provide additional habitat for many rare species to coexist. We conclude that the use of fire and fire surrogate treatments in Sierran mixed-conifer forests is justified from the standpoint of their effects on leaf litter arthropods, but the history of management at the site and the scale of treatments must be carefully considered.