Analysis reveals potential negative impacts of prescribed burning on biodiversity in a global hotspot, suggesting urgent reevaluation of policies.
Fire, both intentional and unintentional, is of major concern in Australia with the likelihood of increasing fire frequencies due to global warming. In Western Australia, a policy of prescribed burning has been in place since the mid-20th Century. It currently targets the annual burning of 200,000 ha of bushland, in Western Australia’s unique south-west biodiversity hotspot. The State Government Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) is the agency responsible for prescribed burning in Western Australia. The practice aims to protect life and property, but research shows the frequent burning of large tracts of bushland remote from habitation is ineffective in preventing wildfires. DBCA’s current burning programme is likely to have a negative impact on a range of species that rely on long-unburnt habitats for their survival. Despite this, DBCA currently conducts no rigorous monitoring of the effects of its prescribed burning programme on biodiversity, eschewing any surveys before and following burns. Thus, DBCA avoids its remit to conserve biodiversity and natural values in the forests and bushland it manages. In addition, DBCA currently has no policy on the retention of extensive areas of long-unburnt habitat, which are pivotal for the survival of some iconic species.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bradshaw et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: