Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/58280
Title: In situ provisioning wildlife with food, water, or shelter after bushfires: Using a One Welfare framework to guide responses
Contributor(s): Bidda Jones (author); Catherine Herbert (author); Samantha Finnerty (author); Kennedy, Brooke  (author); Lykins, Amy  (author)orcid ; Martin, John M (author); McManus, Phil (author); Raubenheimer, David (author); Shaw, Michelle (author); McGreevy, Paul D  (author)orcid 
Publication Date: 2023-11
Open Access: Yes
DOI: 10.3390/ani13223518
Handle Link: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/58280
Abstract: 

Australia’s 2019–2020 bushfires had a devastating impact on animals, humans, and ecosystems. They also demonstrated the lack of evidence or guidance for wildlife provisioning in response to severe fire events when volunteers and wildlife organisations rose to respond. In addition, the unprecedented scale and intensity of the fires and an absence of institutional support for wildlife provisioning meant that well-intentioned interventions were largely uncoordinated and lacked clear short-term, mid-term, and long-term objectives. Fundamentally, a lack of consensus was revealed on whether any such interventions are advisable. Given the strong evidence indicating that future bushfire seasons will become longer and more intense in Australia and elsewhere, the welfare and survival of millions of wild animals are at risk every year. Understanding the impacts of supplementary resource interventions and contributing to the development of best practice information is crucial to inform the response to the next major fire event. Here, we contextualize the arguments for and against provisioning within a ‘One Welfare’ framework that recognizes that animal welfare, biodiversity, and the environment are intertwined with human welfare and community resilience. We propose that the One Welfare approach can facilitate appropriate consideration of the extant scientific and lay literature; local legislation; views of stakeholders; emerging data; and modelling from historic fire events. As a further step, we see merit in engaging with wildlife provisioners and the broader conservation community to build an evidence base for future wildlife provisioning activities. From an informed position, we can encourage beneficial interventions and reduce the risk of negative outcomes. Finally, we propose controlled experiments (e.g., using hazard reduction burns), ongoing data collection using emergent technology, and longitudinal analysis to address shifting research priorities as the climate changes. We conclude that the ordered collection of the necessary evidence relevant to each of the three stakeholder groups in the One Welfare framework has the greatest potential to support an informed policy platform on wildlife provisioning across Australia that is feasible, legal, and sustainable.

Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Animals, 13(22), p. 1-15
Publisher: MDPI AG
Place of Publication: Switzerland
ISSN: 2076-2615
Fields of Research (FoR) 2020: 370903 Natural hazards
300306 Animal welfare
520501 Community psychology
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2020: 190101 Climate change adaptation measures (excl. ecosystem)
109902 Animal welfare
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Environmental and Rural Science
School of Psychology

Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
openpublished/InSituKennedyLykinsMcGreevy2023JournalArticle.pdfPublished Version982.93 kBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

1
checked on Oct 12, 2024

Page view(s)

212
checked on Oct 13, 2024

Download(s)

44
checked on Oct 13, 2024
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons