Scholarlink

Background <p>Large and severe bushfires (wildfires) continue to burn and cause terrible damage in Australia and the US. Both countries have responded to this threat by implementing management strategies and policies with differing results. This paper examines solutions that each country is working to implement with the goal of achieving a more sustainable fire environment for ecosystems and people, focusing on prescribed burn programs. While there are similarities in responses, there are also differences that are highlighted.</p> Results <p>When comparing prescribed burn programs, there are major differences in program efficiency between the two countries. In Australia, you can plan and implement a burn in the same year, including incorporating specialist feedback, while in the US, this takes years on federal lands. While Australia and the US are similar in certain planning functions, Australia has streamlined the process to facilitate implementation which is a great advantage. Australia also has the Prescribed Burn Decision Support Tool to support fire managers in determining the risk of prescribed fire implementation and to document managers’ decisions. The US provides more comprehensive training for prescribed fires including producing lighting (ignition) and holding bosses and has better fire behaviour and modelling systems that can assist in planning prescribed fires.</p> Conclusions <p>There are major differences between the two countries regarding implementing prescribed fires with Australia being more efficient. Australia has developed a streamlined process that facilitates action and a mechanism to ensure bushfire risk is reduced when identified. Sourcing and incorporating sound environmental guidance into prescribed burn plans in a reasonable timeframe is critical to the success and effectiveness of fire management programs. Allowing more Indigenous people to lead land stewardship and creating new workforces that focus on prescribed fire and ecosystem stewardship would be significant steps forward for both countries. While there are challenges, looking at what each county is doing successfully could enhance outcomes in both countries.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Australia and the United States have many similarities and differences in prescribed fire management: learning from each other

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月28日

查看全文
  • Brian Levine,
  • Scott L. Stephens

摘要

Background

Large and severe bushfires (wildfires) continue to burn and cause terrible damage in Australia and the US. Both countries have responded to this threat by implementing management strategies and policies with differing results. This paper examines solutions that each country is working to implement with the goal of achieving a more sustainable fire environment for ecosystems and people, focusing on prescribed burn programs. While there are similarities in responses, there are also differences that are highlighted.

Results

When comparing prescribed burn programs, there are major differences in program efficiency between the two countries. In Australia, you can plan and implement a burn in the same year, including incorporating specialist feedback, while in the US, this takes years on federal lands. While Australia and the US are similar in certain planning functions, Australia has streamlined the process to facilitate implementation which is a great advantage. Australia also has the Prescribed Burn Decision Support Tool to support fire managers in determining the risk of prescribed fire implementation and to document managers’ decisions. The US provides more comprehensive training for prescribed fires including producing lighting (ignition) and holding bosses and has better fire behaviour and modelling systems that can assist in planning prescribed fires.

Conclusions

There are major differences between the two countries regarding implementing prescribed fires with Australia being more efficient. Australia has developed a streamlined process that facilitates action and a mechanism to ensure bushfire risk is reduced when identified. Sourcing and incorporating sound environmental guidance into prescribed burn plans in a reasonable timeframe is critical to the success and effectiveness of fire management programs. Allowing more Indigenous people to lead land stewardship and creating new workforces that focus on prescribed fire and ecosystem stewardship would be significant steps forward for both countries. While there are challenges, looking at what each county is doing successfully could enhance outcomes in both countries.