Prospects

Abstract

The richness of insect faunas, and the great variety of natural biotopes and anthropogenic environments they occupy and that are affected by fires, ensures that exceptions (among species, wider assemblages or resource responses) will occur to any protocols or prescriptions devised as generalities for the use of burning in management. Continuing debate over the wisdom of prescribed fires in conservation management is wholly understandable: it is impossible to assess all variables of the environment, fire characteristics and local biota that may interact, even under the most controlled conditions. However, repeated experiences of fire use in defined environments such as boreal forest, prairie or other savanna or cropping areas has prompted some generalities to be advanced as broad guidelines, by some consensus over predicting outcomes. More specific modifications as recommendations for fire intensity, frequency or season are needed for individual cases or species conservation management, and the numerous examples cited in this overview collectively furnish some of the themes that need careful consideration and possible refinement. Nevertheless, the ‘precautionary principle’ of conservatism in use of fire is widespread, encouraged by knowledge that any given fire could be as much a threat as a benefit when suggested for species or biotope management. In practice, many prescribed fires proposed for conservation may have to compromise with political and human concerns for wider issues that render wellbeing of ‘bugs’ very low priority to large sections of the populace. Many commentators would urge the approach of ‘if in doubt, don’t burn’, but finding alternative management methods that are equally effective, and not more expensive or logistically complex to satisfy human concerns over large areas of terrain can be problematical.