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

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The 2019–2020 Black Summer bushfires had a devastating impact on Australian biodiversity. Many affected human communities felt compelled to intervene by organizing and providing food, water, and/or shelter to affected wildlife in situ (‘wildlife provisioning’). While well intentioned, due to the unprecedented scale and intensity of the fires, a lack of institutional support for wildlife provisioning, and what was revealed to be a lack of scientific evidence, this response was largely uncoordinated and a substantial amount of research is required to determine the beneficial and/or negative outcomes of such practices as a response to habitat destruction by bushfires. We propose a ‘One Welfare’ approach that recognizes the interconnection of human, animal, and environmental welfare and examines the existing literature; local legislation; views of stakeholders; emerging data; and modelling from fire events. There is strong evidence indicating that future bushfire seasons will become longer and more intense in Australia and elsewhere, putting the welfare and survival of millions of wild animals at risk every year. If this approach were implemented, we anticipate that best practice recommendations for stakeholders in different contexts would emerge to determine if, when, and how wildlife provisioning best be conducted, now and into the future. 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.