UF Survey Shows Floridians Support Prescribed Burning, With Misgivings

May 31, 2000

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — As drought-induced wildfires spring up across the state, a University of Florida survey shows most Florida residents recognize the importance of prescribed burning — although they don’t like the smoke and wrongly believe that the fires hurt wildlife.

The survey of 675 Florida residents statewide, however, was completed before the Los Alamos fires, and UF researchers fear news reports about the incident could result in a backlash in public opinion against prescribed fires.

“I think there will be some fallout, which will be unfortunate because healthy ecosystems in Florida depend on fire,” said Susan Jacobson, a UF professor of wildlife ecology and conservation in UF’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences and one of three UF researchers leading the survey. “However, it was good that U.S. Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt took responsibility for mistakes involving the Los Alamos burn so quickly after the accident.”

The survey of rural and suburban Florida residents, completed last year, followed the state’s extensive wildfires of summer 1998. Set to be presented at the Society for Conservation Biology annual meeting in June, the results showed most Floridians have a good grasp of the benefits of prescribed fire. These include minimizing the risk of wildfires and improving the health of Florida’s native forest, scrub and prairie systems. For example, longleaf pine forests are uniquely adapted to survive low-intensity fires and depend on the fires to restrict growth of competing trees.

Paradoxically, the survey also showed Floridians oppose some aspects of prescribed fires. Respondents said they wanted stricter controls on the activity, that they value high air quality more than prescribed burning, and that fire damages wildlife populations. In fact, fire benefits wildlife by creating new growth for forage and otherwise improving habitat, Jacobson said.

Moreover, 37 percent of respondents could not correctly define prescribed fire.

“We learned there is a somewhat schizophrenic perspective on fire in Florida,” the researchers’ final report on the survey concluded.

Once the results were in, the researchers developed educational materials tailored to address the weak spots in public understanding of prescribed fire. The fact sheets, CD-ROM, video library and other materials were assembled into a “tool kit” distributed statewide to county extension agents for use in educational outreach programs about prescribed burning.

One brochure describes how to landscape around Florida homes to guard against the threat of wildfires, while taking into account the environmental benefits a well-landscaped area can provide, such as wildlife cover and shade. For example, the brochure advises residents to guard against the spread of fire by planting “shrub islands” or patches of perennials rather than continuous beds. The brochure also suggests removing flammable plants such as saw palmetto and wax myrtle from within 30 feet of their homes.

The brochure is the first publication to cover the fire and landscaping issue so comprehensively for Florida residents, said Martha Monroe, an assistant professor in UF’s school of forest resources and conservation and the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

“Most of the available information addressed the fire threat to homes in the Western states, which is an entirely different situation,” she said. “We tailored the brochure to reflect Florida’s environment and landscaping possibilities.”

The survey and tool kit were funded with a $79,000 grant from the Advisory Council on Environmental Education at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The Nature Conservancy and the Florida Division of Forestry assisted UF on the project.