In Situ Provisioning Wildlife with Food, Water, or Shelter after Bushfires: Using a One Welfare Framework to Guide Responses

Bidda Jones; Catherine Herbert; Samantha Finnerty; Brooke Kennedy; Amy Lykins; John M Martin; Phil McManus; David Raubenheimer; Michelle Shaw; Paul D McGreevy

doi:10.3390/ani13223518

In Situ Provisioning Wildlife with Food, Water, or Shelter after Bushfires: Using a One Welfare Framework to Guide Responses

Animals (Basel). 2023 Nov 14;13(22):3518. doi: 10.3390/ani13223518.

Authors

Bidda Jones^{1

2}, Catherine Herbert³, Samantha Finnerty³, Brooke Kennedy⁴, Amy Lykins⁵, John M Martin³, Phil McManus⁶, David Raubenheimer^{3

7}, Michelle Shaw⁸, Paul D McGreevy^{3

4}

Affiliations

¹ School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
² Australian Alliance for Animals, 16 Goodhope Street, Paddington, NSW 2021, Australia.
³ School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
⁴ School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2353, Australia.
⁵ School of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2353, Australia.
⁶ School of Geosciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
⁷ Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
⁸ Welfare, Conservation and Science, Taronga Conservation Society Australia, Mosman, NSW 2088, Australia.

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.

Keywords: community motivations; fire; natural disaster; nutrition; shelter; water.

Grants and funding

This research received no external funding.