私人土地所有者对加州规定火灾的兴趣:内华达山脉研讨会的结论

IF 3.6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Kate M. Wilkin, Amanda M. Stasiewicz, Susan D. Kocher
{"title":"私人土地所有者对加州规定火灾的兴趣:内华达山脉研讨会的结论","authors":"Kate M. Wilkin, Amanda M. Stasiewicz, Susan D. Kocher","doi":"10.1186/s42408-024-00277-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Globally, prescribed fire political interest and practice has been rekindled following recent devastating wildfire seasons. This phenomenon was especially acute in areas with dual wildfire and forest health crises, like California. Previous research has investigated prescribed fire on public lands or on private lands in other regions, but little is known about prescribed fire practice or interest on private lands in California. Therefore, we sought to understand private land managers’ perceptions of prescribed fire compared to other land management techniques, treatment pathways, motivations, and barriers to complete these treatments in California. Before workshops on prescribed fire for private lands, we surveyed participants in six prescribed fires on private lands workshops in the Central Sierra Nevada from 2018 to 2019 (N = 172). We found that participants “want to use” pile burns and broadcast prescribed fires more than other land management treatments. There was also a strong interest in mechanical treatments in contrast to low interest in grazing. Some participants had “heard about” and “want to use” some pathways to apply prescribed fire on their lands, including government programs, contractors, friends and family, and Prescribed Burn Associations (PBAs). People had multiple objectives for their prescribed fire goals, and the majority wanted to promote ecosystem health, e.g., reduce fire hazards, foster natural land health, and reduce invasive plants. Perceived barriers were greatest for safety, cost, and resources while fewer participants perceived permits as a barrier. Participants were in the early stages of considering using broadcast prescribed fire and would like to burn small areas, potentially to build confidence and skills. At the time of our research, there was strong interest in using prescribed fire on private lands, and some perceived best pathways and barriers to be unique from prescribed fire practice on public lands. At the same time, private lands managers who responded said they want to promote ecosystem health and reduce wildfire risk and impacts, which is a shared a common motivation with public lands managers. Studies and reports on prescribed burning need to clearly distinguish between broadcast prescribed burning and pile burning to ensure consistency in results and conclusions about prescribed fire use.","PeriodicalId":12273,"journal":{"name":"Fire Ecology","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Private landowner interest in prescribed fire in California: findings from workshops in the Sierra Nevada\",\"authors\":\"Kate M. Wilkin, Amanda M. Stasiewicz, Susan D. Kocher\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42408-024-00277-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Globally, prescribed fire political interest and practice has been rekindled following recent devastating wildfire seasons. This phenomenon was especially acute in areas with dual wildfire and forest health crises, like California. Previous research has investigated prescribed fire on public lands or on private lands in other regions, but little is known about prescribed fire practice or interest on private lands in California. Therefore, we sought to understand private land managers’ perceptions of prescribed fire compared to other land management techniques, treatment pathways, motivations, and barriers to complete these treatments in California. Before workshops on prescribed fire for private lands, we surveyed participants in six prescribed fires on private lands workshops in the Central Sierra Nevada from 2018 to 2019 (N = 172). We found that participants “want to use” pile burns and broadcast prescribed fires more than other land management treatments. There was also a strong interest in mechanical treatments in contrast to low interest in grazing. Some participants had “heard about” and “want to use” some pathways to apply prescribed fire on their lands, including government programs, contractors, friends and family, and Prescribed Burn Associations (PBAs). People had multiple objectives for their prescribed fire goals, and the majority wanted to promote ecosystem health, e.g., reduce fire hazards, foster natural land health, and reduce invasive plants. Perceived barriers were greatest for safety, cost, and resources while fewer participants perceived permits as a barrier. Participants were in the early stages of considering using broadcast prescribed fire and would like to burn small areas, potentially to build confidence and skills. At the time of our research, there was strong interest in using prescribed fire on private lands, and some perceived best pathways and barriers to be unique from prescribed fire practice on public lands. At the same time, private lands managers who responded said they want to promote ecosystem health and reduce wildfire risk and impacts, which is a shared a common motivation with public lands managers. Studies and reports on prescribed burning need to clearly distinguish between broadcast prescribed burning and pile burning to ensure consistency in results and conclusions about prescribed fire use.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fire Ecology\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fire Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-024-00277-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fire Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-024-00277-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全球范围内,继最近几个毁灭性的野火季节之后,人们重新燃起了对处方火的政治兴趣并开始实践处方火。这种现象在加州等同时面临野火和森林健康危机的地区尤为严重。以前的研究曾调查过其他地区公共土地或私人土地上的规定火源,但对加利福尼亚州私人土地上的规定火源实践或兴趣却知之甚少。因此,我们试图了解私人土地管理者与其他土地管理技术相比对规定火种的看法、处理途径、动机以及在加州完成这些处理的障碍。在举办私人土地明火研讨会之前,我们调查了 2018 年至 2019 年期间在内华达山脉中部举办的六次私人土地明火研讨会的参与者(N = 172)。我们发现,与其他土地管理方法相比,参与者更 "希望使用 "堆烧和广播式规定火。此外,与会者对机械处理方法兴趣浓厚,而对放牧方法兴趣不大。一些参与者 "听说过 "并 "想要使用 "在其土地上使用规定火源的一些途径,包括政府项目、承包商、朋友和家人以及规定燃烧协会 (PBA)。人们的规定燃放目标有多种,大多数人希望促进生态系统健康,例如减少火灾危害、促进自然土地健康和减少入侵植物。参与者认为最大的障碍是安全、成本和资源,而认为许可证是障碍的人较少。参与者处于考虑使用播撒式规定火源的早期阶段,他们希望燃烧小块区域,以建立信心和技能。在我们进行研究时,人们对在私有土地上使用规定火源有着浓厚的兴趣,一些人认为最佳途径和障碍与在公共土地上使用规定火源的做法截然不同。与此同时,作出回应的私人土地管理者表示,他们希望促进生态系统健康并降低野火风险和影响,这与公共土地管理者有着共同的动机。有关规定燃烧的研究和报告需要明确区分广播规定燃烧和堆积燃烧,以确保有关规定燃烧使用的结果和结论的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Private landowner interest in prescribed fire in California: findings from workshops in the Sierra Nevada
Globally, prescribed fire political interest and practice has been rekindled following recent devastating wildfire seasons. This phenomenon was especially acute in areas with dual wildfire and forest health crises, like California. Previous research has investigated prescribed fire on public lands or on private lands in other regions, but little is known about prescribed fire practice or interest on private lands in California. Therefore, we sought to understand private land managers’ perceptions of prescribed fire compared to other land management techniques, treatment pathways, motivations, and barriers to complete these treatments in California. Before workshops on prescribed fire for private lands, we surveyed participants in six prescribed fires on private lands workshops in the Central Sierra Nevada from 2018 to 2019 (N = 172). We found that participants “want to use” pile burns and broadcast prescribed fires more than other land management treatments. There was also a strong interest in mechanical treatments in contrast to low interest in grazing. Some participants had “heard about” and “want to use” some pathways to apply prescribed fire on their lands, including government programs, contractors, friends and family, and Prescribed Burn Associations (PBAs). People had multiple objectives for their prescribed fire goals, and the majority wanted to promote ecosystem health, e.g., reduce fire hazards, foster natural land health, and reduce invasive plants. Perceived barriers were greatest for safety, cost, and resources while fewer participants perceived permits as a barrier. Participants were in the early stages of considering using broadcast prescribed fire and would like to burn small areas, potentially to build confidence and skills. At the time of our research, there was strong interest in using prescribed fire on private lands, and some perceived best pathways and barriers to be unique from prescribed fire practice on public lands. At the same time, private lands managers who responded said they want to promote ecosystem health and reduce wildfire risk and impacts, which is a shared a common motivation with public lands managers. Studies and reports on prescribed burning need to clearly distinguish between broadcast prescribed burning and pile burning to ensure consistency in results and conclusions about prescribed fire use.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Fire Ecology
Fire Ecology ECOLOGY-FORESTRY
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
7.80%
发文量
24
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Fire Ecology is the international scientific journal supported by the Association for Fire Ecology. Fire Ecology publishes peer-reviewed articles on all ecological and management aspects relating to wildland fire. We welcome submissions on topics that include a broad range of research on the ecological relationships of fire to its environment, including, but not limited to: Ecology (physical and biological fire effects, fire regimes, etc.) Social science (geography, sociology, anthropology, etc.) Fuel Fire science and modeling Planning and risk management Law and policy Fire management Inter- or cross-disciplinary fire-related topics Technology transfer products.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信