Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
Similar to BushfireConf2015 - 14. Vegetation management in peri-urban landscapes: Perceptions & response to fire & risk
Similar to BushfireConf2015 - 14. Vegetation management in peri-urban landscapes: Perceptions & response to fire & risk (20)
More from Bushfire Program - Nature Conservation Council NSW
More from Bushfire Program - Nature Conservation Council NSW (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
BushfireConf2015 - 14. Vegetation management in peri-urban landscapes: Perceptions & response to fire & risk
- 1. Vegetation management in peri-urban landscapes: Perceptions & response to fire & risk Emily Moskwa, Guy Robinson, Delene Weber & Douglas Bardsley 26 May 2015
- 2. Part of an ARC Linkage project titled Bushfires & Biodiversity: Optimising conservation outcomes in peri-urban areas at risk RESEARCH TEAM: Prof Guy Robinson & Dr Delene Weber – University of South Australia Dr Douglas Bardsley – The University of Adelaide Emily Moskwa – Postdoc Researcher (UniSA & UofA) DEWNR & NRM Partner Investigators: Kirstin Abley, David McKenna, Di DeLaine & Daniel Rogers Feb 2014 – Jan 2017
- 3. Bushfires & Biodiversity Our project addresses and seeks to balance two concerns: 2) The need for effective conservation measures to maintain important & unique biodiversity 1) The threat of destructive bushfires occurring close to residential areas
- 6. Data Collection • Postal survey (in 2014) with 1000+ responses • Interviews (in 2015) • Focus groups (ongoing)
- 7. Today’s Focus: What does it mean to use fire for restoration? 1) determine levels of support of fire for restoration 2) determine understanding of fire for restoration 3) determine information sources influencing support & understanding
- 8. 1) Level of Support
- 9. 2) Understanding What does it mean in terms of understanding fire for biodiversity?
- 10. What does it mean in terms of understanding risk? 2) Understanding
- 11. *Significant differences between various ways of finding out about these issues & the level of support for prescribed burns: Vital that policy makers understand the public response & formulate suitable education & engagement programs to enhance public awareness & understanding Source Support in General Support if for Restoration CFS materials * * State Govt. Dept. of Environment * * Conservation organisations * * Read newspapers * Talk to neighbours * Talk to friends Listen to news radio Attend public meetings 3) Information Sources
- 12. Next Steps? • Raise community awareness of the significance of integrating biodiversity conservation & bushfire management • Assist local and state authorities in understanding residents’ perceptions to help find a managed response to policy challenges • Guide the development of appropriate community engagement materials
- 13. Contact
Editor's Notes
- In the Adelaide Hills and foothills for example, where this image is taken, residents enjoy a lifestyle that embraces both the semi-rural location while accommodating residential living, business and national and conservation parks. A large proportion is classified as having high or extreme bushfire risk – in fact it is considered to be the most densely populated high bushfire prone area in South Australia. We also have a number of animal species that have experienced recent rapid decline or that are endangered such as the Scarlet Robin, Southern Brown Bandicoot, Wood White Butterfly and Pygmy Copperhead Snake. Catastrophic fires in the urban–rural interface are reframing perceptions of what constitutes effective vegetation management. A number of recent fires in South Australia have refocussed attention on bushfire risk and in our study we explore community support for and concerns of vegetation clearance and controlled burns undertaken for hazard reduction and ecological restoration purposes. The goal is to assist Australian governments and practitioners, and particularly the SA Government, through the Department of Environment, Water, and Natural Resources (DEWNR) and regional natural resource management (NRM) Boards, to understand people’s values, beliefs and perceptions about bushfire risk and biodiversity in order to improve vegetation management policy and practice and transform the support received from community for effective policy.
- Two principal study areas in SA: Adelaide-Mount Lofty Ranges Lower Eyre Peninsula Communities living in the Adelaide-Mount Lofty Ranges and Eyre Peninsula have experienced quite regular destructive bushfires causing loss of life and extensive property damage. The recent fire history of the two areas, however, is quite distinct. In 1983, over 160,000ha of the Adelaide-Mount Lofty Range was burnt in the Ash Wednesday fires, with 28 fatalities recorded. The Lower Eyre Peninsula has experienced more recent fires, notably in 2005 where bushfires burnt over 77,000ha and resulted in 9 fatalities. Of course since we commenced our project the Adelaide Hills have now also experienced a recent, severe bushfire at Sampson Flat in January 2015 – adding another dimension to our research. So with these risks to people, place and property, the management of vegetation for bushfire risk mitigation is highly contentious. For example, the Mayor of Port Lincoln stated on radio in 2012 that “Locals have complained that they were in constant disagreement about the need to get rid of dense scrub and flammable vegetation but the Native Vegetation Act makes it an offence to disturb habitats, rare species and scrub…[but] the [recent] fire did it in one fell swoop”.
- Surveys took approx. 25 to 30 mins to complete Respondents received a $20 thank you gift Image: Clearance in native vegetation following the fire has created other fire hazard issues for assets and properties. Survey: To explore perceptions of risk, fire and vegetation management in urban–rural interfaces with regard to biodiversity values and relationships to landscape in order to understand community concerns for the maintenance of healthy and functional lands. identify perceptions of local residents regarding both the growing risk of bushfires and the need to conserve biodiversity in peri-urban areas; develop understandings of the relationships between these perceptions and people’s demographic and geographical situations, as well as their level of knowledge of fire, conservation management and biodiversity;
- Today I’m giving a quick snapshot of a few of the questions we asked in our survey that relate to this question of: What does it mean to use fire for restoration? Support of fire for restoration Understanding of fire for restoration Sources used to obtain information about fire, fire prevention, and biodiversity more generally.
- StatementMean Regular prescribed burning (every 5 years) is a good idea5.83 Prescribed burning undertaken in general is effective5.63 Prescribed burning undertaken in conservation areas is acceptable5.65 Prescribed burning undertaken close to my home is acceptable5.64 Prescribed burning undertaken for biodiversity conservation is acceptable5.79 Biodiversity conservation should not take priority over bushfire risk mitigation4.95
- What does it mean? Talking about the significance of something It means different things to different people, but most commonly people wrote about what it means in terms of RISK for living there, and what it means for BIODIVERSITY either winning or losing. Note: the vast majority of responses suggest an approach to the issues from a long-term viewpoint (77% of comments), not just in the short-term. Image: Revegetation efforts is observed amongst recently burnt native vegetation indicating a lack of understanding. Greater understanding of how native vegetation responds after bushfire would have prevented this unnecessary revegetation. Quotes: “I walk [in the Adelaide Hills] several times a week for sanity and fitness, and I am so disheartened that burn-offs destroy what the native animals and birds need for survival, and in its place grows bracken, blackberries, broom & all other pests and weeds.” “I am torn. I have met with DEWNR ecologists and seen the benefits of burning, and my house is in a high danger area - but I feel that the 5% quota is the main driver rather than any planning considerations.” “From my experience cool burning is a very effective tool in [nature conservation].“ “[Prescribed burning] is a great way of introducing weeds which in the end create a bigger hazard.”
- Quotes: “We have genuine fears that a prescribed burn may get out of control and burn our house down! The debris left behind from a recent burn-off we think is unacceptable. Yes, it creates habitat for animals, but also fuel for fires.” “I can see almost contradictory responses I have made e.g. preventative burning is positive & bushfire risk reduced through vegetation management however, vegetation management to maximise biodiversity is very important too! CFS encourage cutting of native gum trees close to houses but if all were removed 20m from houses there would be none left!“
- When we think about these meanings, we can also think about MESSAGES. When things have meaning, they tend to have implications – messages are often conveyed or interpreted. So where do people get their messages and information from? In a context where climate change is increasing bushfire-related risks in suburban areas, it is vital that policy makers understand the public response and formulate suitable education and engagement programs to enhance public awareness of bushfire risk, conservation and the role of fire in maintaining biodiversity. Main sources of information on biodiversity conservation? Listen to news radio (49%) Read newspapers (42%) State Govt. Dept. of Environment / Conservation organisations (29%) Talk to friends (22%) Use the Internet (22%) Talk to neighbours (16%) Main sources of information on bushfire prevention? CFS (60%) Listen to news radio (51%) Read newspapers (37%) Attend public meetings (19%) Talk to neighbours (15%)
- Many changes in vegetation management may ultimately compromise the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation policy, as well as the perceived values of green space for recreation, health and amenity. Where Government implements policy for significantly more prescribed burning or clearance of native vegetation to reduce fuel loads, the very nature of the local biodiversity may change. The challenge therefore is to implement bushfire risk mitigation that could catalyse improvements in biodiversity management by favourably disposing residents towards land-use planning for conservation and risk management. A key benefit of the work would be the examination of how information could be packaged and delivered to better inform residents of the roles of biodiversity conservation and the goals of bushfire management and how these issues are strongly integrated. As mentioned, findings will assist policymakers with their management of public responses to fire risk and conservation issues, and will guide the development of education and engagement programs to enhance public awareness of bushfire risk, conservation, and the role of fire in maintaining biodiversity. It is considered that the work will advise relevant organisations regarding key policy directions relating to: reduction of fuel loads in areas of high bushfire risk patterns of urban development in areas of high risk prescribed burning in conservation areas or clearing of remnant vegetation access tracks, securing of refuges or securing of access routes planting of less-combustible vegetation It also offers links to local and state government climate change adaptation projects. Image: Lincoln weed in the background of photo where there is no native vegetation. Note the limited weed cover in the burnt native vegetation.