A Burning Question: Can Long-term Data Inform Fire Management in the Twenty-first Century? - Biodiversity Conservation and Environmental Change - page 81

biodiversity benefits, such initiatives are urgently needed as the Australian continent is pre-
dicted to become increasingly drier and fire-prone in the coming decades (Bowman and
Murphy 2011). An adaptive risk management framework, and stronger partnerships between
scientists, fire management agencies, and other stakeholder groups is needed to ensure that
fire management objectives are feasible to managers but also ecologically realistic and
socially acceptable (Penman et al. 2011).
Studies of traditional patch mosaic burning are invaluable for restoring habitat heterogen-
eity and undoing the homogenization that resulted from fire suppression or regular burning.
Patch mosaic burning has now been adopted in the Kruger National Park, South Africa, where
various fire management strategies, including fire suppression (1898-1956) regular burns
(1957-1980), variable burns (1981-1992), and lightning fires (1992-2001) had little effect on area
burned, which was found primarily to respond to rainfall (see Figure 4.7). The new approach
uses rainfall data from the previous two seasons to calculate the target for the area to be
burned. Low intensity, patch burns take place in the early dry season (May/June), which
breaks up the fuel load and creates a mosaic of burned and unburned areas. If lightning/
wildfires occur in areas where fire is deemed necessary, they are allowed to burn, unless the
target area has been exceeded, in which case they are suppressed. This approach reduces the
chance of intense, late season burns, and aims to suppress shrub encroachment while still
providing refuges for fire-sensitive species. Like all of Kruger's management, it is flexible and
adaptive, responding to changing environmental conditions, emerging scientific evidence,
and societal needs. This patch mosaic approach maintains biodiversity and heterogeneity
and improves game viewing (van Wilgen and Biggs 2011).
Use an adaptive management framework that includes stakeholder
perspectives and a past-present-future perspective
The management of forests, savannas, heathlands, and other fire-prone landscapes is often a
controversial and emotive issue, wrought with scientific uncertainty, economic ramifica-
tions, and social nuance. Fire management decisions have consequences for biodiversity,
natural resources, cultural and heritage values, and ecosystem services (Noss et al. 2006,
Franklin and Johnson 2011, Turner et al. 2013). Public health concerns and land ownership
issues all affect how fire regimes are perceived and the opportunities available for fire restora-
tion and management.
Fire-prone ecosystems have often been shaped by, and continue to shape, human society.
They are complex socioecological systems, and within the realms of what is ecologically pos-
sible, there are many different management options for fire-prone landscapes. People have
the capacity to manipulate savanna, heathland, and forest mosaic landscapes through mech-
anical clearing, grazing, planting, and the suppression or ignition of fires, which means that
different vegetation assemblages, landscape configurations, and fire regimes are possible
(Motzkin and Foster2002, Bond and Archibald 2003, Foster and Motzkin 2003, Bowman and
Murphy 2011). Furthermore, future environmental, management, and economic scenarios
need to be evaluated, so that management remains flexible, adaptive, and responsive to
changing environmental conditions (Jackson et al.2009b, Shakesby 2011).