Achieving ecological integrity in protected areas: aligning fire management with conservation objectives
Creators: name: Dixon, Kelly
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 2019

description: Protected areas (PAs) are key for biodiversity conservation strategies worldwide, however, they are also managed in ways that may conflict with conservation objectives, especially for activities such as fire management. Monitoring and evaluation (M&amp;E) is therefore crucial for effective biodiversity conservation in PAs, however it is often criticised as ineffective. My thesis has two components: (1) an ecological case study that investigated how the management action of prescribed burning achieved fuel management and conservation objectives within a protected area; and (2) a worldwide survey of protected area staff that aimed to identify features associated with effective M&amp;E within PAs. I investigated how time since fire impacted fuel hazard and biodiversity within a large Australian PA. Time since prescribed or wildfire ranged from 0.5 years to at least 96 years. I used a space-for-time study at 81 sites in dry and wet sclerophyll forests and sub-alpine woodlands to identify: overall fuel hazard; reptile richness, abundance and composition; and mammal richness and composition. I found that overall fuel hazard was higher in forests and woodlands burnt within 6-12 years previously than those unburnt for at least 96 years. Reptile richness and abundance and mammal richness were significantly higher, and reptile and mammal composition were different, in long-unburnt sites (&gt;96 years since fire) than younger fire ages (0.5-2 and 6-12 years since fire). There was no difference in reptile or mammal richness or composition, or reptile abundance, between sites 0.5-2 years since fire and sites 6-12 years since fire. Long-unburnt sites (&gt;96 years since fire) were significantly more important for seven mammal species and younger sites) were significantly more important for one mammal species. These results demonstrated the disproportionate importance of long-unburnt forests and woodlands in my study area for managing biodiversity and fuel hazard. Long-unburnt forests and woodlands often comprise a small proportion of PAs (only ~8% in my study area). However, prescribed burning in my study area (and Australian forests and woodlands more generally) is typically undertaken at frequencies &lt;5 years. Given PAs are the cornerstone of biodiversity conservation, why is their management not always evidence-based as demonstrated in my case study? To identify variables associated with effective M&amp;E and barriers to its implementation, I surveyed 243 practitioners from PAs in 55 countries. My results suggested that biodiversity monitoring is undertaken often: 78% of respondents indicated that monitoring occurred and 64% responded that monitoring persisted for at least as long that a management action was implemented. However, a considerable amount of monitoring does not appear to be effective: only 46% of respondents thought that M&amp;E worked well, just 36% provided an example of monitoring informing management and 38% of respondents indicated that management is not undertaken in different ways to facilitate adaptive management. I found that effective M&amp;E and adaptive management were more likely to occur where research and management staff work cooperatively, where a data management framework is implemented and monitoring data are entered into an existing database, stored centrally and are available publicly, results are reported every one to two years, where documented thresholds were in place that trigger management intervention, where intervention options were documented, and where monitoring had persisted for as long as the associated management action. I then drew on results from my survey to arrive at a set of principles for how organisations could more effectively balance fire management with ecological integrity. My thesis highlights that the amount of monitoring in PAs is not the key issue. Effective biodiversity conservation M&amp;E requires organisations to address a broader range of institutional, design and data management issues.