The impact of plant‐derived fire management prescriptions on fire‐responsive bird species

Abstract

In fire‐prone regions, the occurrence of some faunal species is contingent on the presence of resources that arise through post‐fire plant succession. Through planned burning, managers can alter resource availability and aim to provide the conditions required to promote biodiversity. Understanding how species occurrence changes at different spatial and temporal scales after fire is essential to achieve this goal. However, many fire prescriptions are guided primarily by the responses of fire‐sensitive plants when setting tolerable fire intervals. This approach assumes that maintaining floristic diversity will satisfy the requirements of fauna. We surveyed bird species in two semi‐arid vegetation types across an environmental gradient in south‐eastern Australia. We conducted four surveys at each of 253 sites across a 75‐year chronosequence of time since fire and used generalized additive mixed models to examine changes in the occurrence of birds in response to time since fire. Model predictions were compared to plant‐derived fire prescriptions currently guiding fire management in the region. Time since fire was a significant predictor for 18 of 28 species modeled, in at least one vegetation type, over a gradient of 1.3° of latitude. We detected considerable variation in the responses of some species, both between vegetation types and geographically within a vegetation type. Our evaluation of plant‐derived fire prescriptions suggests that the intervals considered acceptable for maintaining floristic diversity may not be sustainable for populations of birds requiring longer unburnt vegetation, with 6 of the 12 species assessed attaining a mean occurrence probability of 20.3% by the minimum tolerable fire interval, and 57.3% by the maximum tolerable fire interval, in their respective vegetation types. Our findings highlight the potential vulnerability of fire‐responsive bird species if fire prescriptions are applied in a manner that fails to account for the slow development of habitat resources needed by some species, and the variation detected within the responses of species. This highlights the need for species‐specific data collected at an appropriate spatial scale to inform management plans.