Endangered species, prescribed fires, and public resistance in a Florida scrub communities.

Abstract

Endangered species management in pyrogenic communities is often complicated by the politics of prescribed fire use. Public resistance to fires had been instilled culturally through past fire suppression policies, in addition to a fear of property loss, though land managers have with increasing success been working to change perceptions and ease concerns. These politics are visible in Savannas Preserve State Park, on Florida's east coast, which is comprised of several natural communities that are adapted to fire and is home to various endangered animals and plants. These ecosystems, however, have not experienced significant burning in many years, and high fuel loads have built-up over time that could lead to catastrophic wildfires. As part of an endangered species management effort, this study presents the need as well as tools for educating residents near the park of the role of prescribed fires in protecting both their property and ecosystem communities.

Resumen

El manejo de especies en peligro de extincion en comunidades pirogenas se complica frecuentemente por las politicas del uso de fuegos prescritos. La resistencia popular a los fuegos habia sido culturalmente infundida a traves de las politicas contra fuego del pasado, ademis del miedo de perdida de propiedad, a pesar de que los administradores han trabajado, cada vez con mils exito, en cambiar las percepciones y aliviar las preocupaciones. Estas politicas son visibles en el parque estatal de la Reserva Savanna en la costa este de Florida, que abarca varias comunidades naturales que estan adaptadas al fuego y son el habitat de varios animales y plantas en peligro de extincion. Sin embargo, estos ecosistemas no han tenido una quema significativa en muchos anos, y altos niveles de combustible se han acumulado a traves de los anos lo que crea la posibilidad de fuegos catastroficos. Como parte del plan de manejo de especies en peligro, este estudio presenta la necesidad, junto con las herramientas, para educar a los residentes que viven cerca del parque acerca del papel que tienen los fuegos prescritos tanto en el ecosistema como en la proteccion de su propiedad.

Introduction

Public perceptions are very important to the successful implementation of prescribed fires for endangered species protection and habitat conservation. Public land managers often must perform a delicate balancing act, promoting the use of fire without alienating residents who might fear the fire and smoke hazards associated with natural or prescribed burns. Yet public resistance is also a legacy of fire suppression policies dating back to the early twentieth century and perpetuated through the 1960s (Pyne 1982, Buckner and Turrill 1990, Reice 2001). Symbolized most visibly by Smokey the Bear, created in the 1940s to remind the public, "Only you can prevent forest fires," the old suppression policies had successfully indoctrinated several generations of adults with the cultural understanding that fires in forests are unambiguously harmful (Buckner and Turrill 1999).

Earlier studies reflected a limited understanding of the ecological benefits of fire among the general public (e.g., Gardner et al. 1987), though more recent studies point to greater public understanding and acceptance of fire as a natural part of some ecosystems (Clute 2000). Attitudes among land managers and scientists were transformed in the 1960s and 1970s as they gained a better understanding of the role of fire in ecosystem processes, which translated into policy changes advocating prescribed fires as a land management tool. Increased environmental awareness in the 1970s and 1980s also led to gradually changing attitudes in the general public towards prescribed fire use. Yet the public remains ambivalent. State forest managers in the Southern US, for instance, report that public resistance remains one of the chief barriers to prescribed fires in the region (Haines et al. 2001), while studies in Florida suggest that in areas where fire is a hazard, residents express support for prescribed fires in principle, though they also maintain wariness regarding their use (Jacobson et al. 2001, Monroe and Nelson 2004, Nelson et al. 2003).

Studies of public fire perceptions advise that expanded implementation of controlled burn policies requires locally targeted public educational programs, which hold a greater chance for success than sounding general alarms about fire danger associated with high fuel loads (Jacobson et al. 2001, Monroe and Nelson 2004). Savannas Preserve State Park, located on Florida's east coast (Fig. 1), is a case in which the successful navigation of fire politics is crucial to endangered species management. The preserve is comprised of several natural communities that are adapted to fire, requiring periodic burning for their maintenance. However, fire has mostly been suppressed in the park for many years, and this suppression threatens endangered species of wildlife and plants, as well as humans and their property. Lying at what has been called a "wildland/urban interface" (Pyne 2003), homes and other suburban infrastructure surrounding the preserve are dangerously close to high fuel loads. If and when catastrophic wildfires occur, these properties will be in great danger of being destroyed. This paper discusses the importance of fire to endangered species in the scrub ecosystem as well as strategies aimed at helping residents in this area to accept the practice of prescribed burning. These strategies include a more direct demonstration of the problem of fuel load build up around homes as well as educating property owners about the benefits to wildlife, particularly endangered species, from reintroducing fire in the scrub habitat.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Senescent Scrub Habitat and Fire Ecology

As its name implies, Savannas Preserve State Park is home to a mix of pyrogenic natural communities that includesmesicflatwoods(2,197acres/889 ha), ephemeral basin marsh (1,592 acres/644 ha), scrubby flatwoods (156 acres/63 ha), and sand pine-oak scrub (446 acres/180.5 ha). Scrub within the Savannas Preserve displays the general characteristics described by Myers as "a xeromorphic shrub community dominated by a layer of evergreen, or nearly evergreen oaks (Quercus geminata, Q. myrtifolia, Q. inopina, Q. chapmanii) or Florida rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides), or both, with or without a pine overstory" (Meyers 1990: 154-5). Soils tend to be nutrient-poor as they are derived mainly from quartz sand and contain practically no organic matter (Meyers 1990). Some natural communities in Savannas, such as the sand pine-oak scrub and basin marsh, are identified as critically imperiled (FNAI 1990, FDEP 2003, Engeman et al. 2004).

The "pyrogenic" quality of scrub ecosystems means that the characteristic species of plants and animals have developed evolutionary adaptations to fire (Wright and Bailey 1982, Herron and Kirk 1999). Despite the importance of fire, scrub is not easy to ignite, and tends to burn only under severe conditions, making it an effective barrier to the spread of fires (Myers 1990). As a result, scrub habitat tends to have fairly long fire cycles. For instance, along Lake Wales Ridge, where most previous scrub fire ecology studies have been performed, fire cycles repeat every 20 to 30 years (Myers 1990). However, scrub in coastal regions tends to grow faster, and consequently needs fire more frequently. In Savannas Preserve, where the scrub habitat lies on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge of Florida, the difference in growth rates probably translates into a fire cycle of about every 15 to 20 years. Areas that have not burned periodically will eventually become an overgrown canopy with a pronounced layer of litter and debris, magnifying the likelihood of an intense crown fire in dry forests (Alverson et al. 1994, Myers 1990, Reice 2001). In the absence of fire, fire-dependent species will eventually disappear as the plant community moves into a later successional stage that is not suitable to the organisms (Wright and Bailey 1982, Buckner and Turrill 1999, Bolen and Robinson 2003).

Lack of fire threatens endangered plant and animal species in the Savannas Preserve. Thirteen of the endemic plant species that occur in Florida scrub habitat (in Savannas and elsewhere) are federally listed as endangered or threatened (Myers 1990). Additionally, 22 endemic species are listed by the State of Florida's enabling legislation, including scrub holly (Ilex opaca var. arenicola), silk bay (Persea humilis), garberia (Garberia heterophylla), palafoxia (Palafoxia feayi), and the wild olive (Osmanthus megacarpa) (Myers 1990). Animal species found in the Preserve and federally listed as threatened include the Florida Scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens, Fig. 2), the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), and the sand skink (Neoseps reynoldsi) (USFWS 1999), while the Florida mouse (Podomys floridanus) and gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus, Fig. 3) are state-listed as species of special concern. Though many of these animals can also survive in other communities, others such as the Florida Scrub-jay, can only survive in scrub.

[FIGURES 2-3 OMITTED]

Maintaining the structure and successional stage of the scrub vegetation is important for its resident wildlife, making fire an important element in species conservation; keeping the shrub layer below a critical height, for instance, prevents Florida Scrub-jays from abandoning sites (Meyers 1990). Additionally, Meyers points out that habitat is eliminated for the Florida mouse, gopher tortoise, scrub lizard (Sceloporus woodi), sand skink, and various birds if a pine canopy develops, shading the scrub oak and open sandy patch understory (Myers 1990). Active habitat management, particularly prescribed burning, is recommended to benefit populations of protected species by maintaining their habitats in the optimal stage of succession (Diemer 1992, Moler 1992, Layne 1992, Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1996).

Environmental Law and Prescribed Fires

Very few prescribed burns have been attempted in Savannas Preserve State Park despite the importance of fires in pyrogenic communities, and even though Federal and State laws recognize and support the necessity of using prescribed fires as an endangered species management tool. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) mandates such programs aimed at the conservation of endangered and threatened species of plants and animals, including the habitats in which they are found (USFWS 2004). The Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) lists scrub communities as globally and state endangered (FNAI 1990, FDEP 2003) largely due to the presence of protected species like the Eastern indigo snake, Florida Scrub-jay, the fragrant prickly apple (Harrisia fragrans), and the four-petal pawpaw (Asimina tetramera).

Florida's Wildlife Code (Chapter 39, Florida Administrative Code) provides additional levels of protection to state-listed endangered or threatened species and wildlife species of special concern in Florida. Wildlife protection on Florida's parklands is placed under the jurisdiction of the Florida Park Service. Additionally, the Florida Prescribed Burning Act (Florida Statute 590.125, formerly FS 590.026) mandates the use of prescribed burning for the management of public lands as essential to maintaining the specific resource values for which such lands were acquired. Not only does the Act "authorize and promote the continued use of prescribed burning for ecological, silvicultural, wildlife management, and range management purposes" (Division of Forestry 1997, 4), it goes even further to state that "significant loss of the state's biological diversity will occur if fire is excluded from fire-dependent systems" (Division of Forestry 1997, 3).

While legislative authorization for burning is clear, accounting for citizen concerns is also viewed as vital, and as a result prescribed burning action must abide by rules set by the Division of Forestry. The major provisions of Florida's prescribed burning regulations (FS 590.125) state that all prescribed fires must

1. [b]e authorized or permitted by the local DOF [Division of Forestry] office, or its designated agent, before the fire is ignited. The permit must be in writing if the burn area is within an area of severe drought emergency (FS 590.081) ... A written prescription must be prepared before a burning authorization is received from the DOF [and] a certified prescribed burn manager must be on site with a copy of the written prescription from ignition of the burn to its completion.

2. [h]ave adequate fire breaks around the planned burn area, and sufficient personnel and firefighting equipment for controlling the fire must be on site.

3. [r]emain with in the boundary of the authorized area.

4. [h]ave someone present at the burn site until the fire is extinguished (which is defined as no spreading flame).

5. [h]ave the specific consent of the landowner or his or her designee." (Long 1999, 3).

A prescribed burning authorization is issued once the DOF determines "that air quality and fire danger are favorable for safe burning. The DOF can cancel authorizations of those conditions change" (Long 1999, 3).

Despite the mandate and these regulations, the use of fire in Savannas Preserve has been severely curtailed for decades, partly due to public resistance stemming from a general fear of fire, and potential smoke management problems for residential areas, schools, and hospitals in close proximity to the preserve (FDEP 2003: 20). Park managers advocate a gradual increase in prescribed fires as homeowners grow more tolerant through experience (FDEP 2003: 22); however, by 2003-2004 only three small scrub burns totaling 11 hectares have been performed after mechanical treatment (horizontal restratification) of the high fuel loads (Fig. 4). These bums were very carefully conducted and did not generate any adverse comments from the neighboring property owners. In addition to these fires, Savannas Preserve staff conducted prescribed burns in 94.2 hectares of pine flatwoods communities during the same period.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

There have been wildfires in Savannas Preserve, which have enhanced public anxieties regarding fire use. The most recent occurred in March 2004 and burned 85 hectares. Unfortunately, however, this fire was confined to pine flatwoods communities and did not burn scrub habitat where it was needed most (Wood 2004). The most recent wildfire in scrub habitat occurred in 1987 and burned 45 hectares in the east-central and northern areas of the park. That fire became very large due to wind gusts of over 40 miles an hour, an extended dry period in the area, and an over-accumulation of flammable materials as the scrub had not been burned in over 25 years, according to neighboring residents Thirty-nine structures near the preserve had to be defended from the towering flames as a result (Van Murphy 1988).

Beyond public wariness due to such obvious danger to property, an additional and significant reason for the slow implementation of prescribed fires specifically in the scrub areas of the preserve is long-term right-of-way (ROW) negotiations between the Park Service and the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad whose tracks border the entire Savannas scrub-dominated eastern boundary. The FEC-owned land along the tracks provides the most feasible access of public land managers to the scrub areas. The legal conundrum has resulted in continuing fire suppression for over 20 years in the scrub because the land occupied by that habitat could not be accessed legally; the Florida Park Service needed to execute a ROW easement agreement with the FEC in order to access the scrublands along the railway to conduct management practices including prescribed fires and mechanical treatments. In May 2003, the liability issues that prevented an agreement were finally resolved, allowing access by Park Service staff to conduct management actions. Public access to the ROW is still prohibited for safety reasons, and Park Service law enforcement officers assist the FEC with patrol duties.

Convincing a Skeptical Public

The removal of the ROW obstacle, along with an increasing public understanding of fire, provides a hopeful signal regarding the future of prescribed burning in Savannas. The next step is to engage the local public in further dialog regarding the importance of prescribed fires for endangered species management. Monroe and Nelson's 2004 study suggests that fire education for residents must go beyond general warnings of the danger of high fuel load accumulation to also provide more pointed messages about the importance of fire in promoting closely held values, such as conservation of wildlife and endangered species. Likewise, Jacobson et al. (2001) advise that education efforts must be directed to local forest issues and address local understandings, rather than rely solely upon generalized fire education, such as in the form of pamphlets (see also Monroe and Nelson 2004). Following such recommendations, convincing the still-ambivalent public will require educational efforts in at least two areas: (1) a locally focused demonstration of the immediate danger to property due to the absence of fire for long periods, and (2) educating local residents about the necessity of fire for protecting endangered species in the preserve.

Regarding the first issue, homes, sheds, garages, vehicles, and other flammable suburban infrastructure lie in close proximity to the senescent scrub with the railroad track ROW serving only as a narrow firebreak between the eastern border of Savannas and these adjacent homes. In the event of an intense wildfire, the weak firebreak would be ineffective in keeping high flames from jumping across the tracks. Further complicating the problem, many of the landowners bordering Savannas Preserve have overgrown fuel loads in their own backyards (see table 1), which could quickly ignite their property and homes, contributing to the potential severity of damage.

To help convince residents living at the edge of Savannas Preserve of the need for prescribed fires, we collected in-field measurements between scrub high fuel loads in the park and surrounding homes and other flammable infrastructure using a global positioning system (GPS) unit, a laser optical range finder, and measuring tapes. Our goal was to determine actual distances between flammable property and accumulated fuel loads. As part of this effort, we examined twenty-one data stations along the Florida East Coast Railroad ROW covering a distance of 8.5 kilometers. We collected GPS coordinates at each station, and at each station, measured the distances between the high fuel loads (FDEE unpubl, data) in the preserve and the flammable neighboring homes and other infrastructure, including measurements of the width of the railroad track ROW (table 1). The measurements demonstrate the close proximity of these suburban homes and infrastructure to the overwhelmingly high fuel loads in Savannas Preserve's scrub, exposing them to risk of damage or destruction in the event of an uncontrolled wildfire such as the one that occurred in March 2004. Had this fire occurred in the senescent scrub habitat where fuel loads are high, the fire may not have been suppressible. Our intent is to take this collected data to residents in public meetings and in individual consultations to demonstrate the seriousness of the fire danger situation.

The second educational task is to convince property owners that prescribed burning will help protect endangered species. Monroe and Nelson (2004) suggest that wildlife protection is a major concern among surveyed residents and that prescribed fire education programs need to emphasize the positive wildlife impacts of burning. Jacobson et al. (2001) suggest that Florida residents in fire hazard areas have a fairly sophisticated understanding of fire issues, but mistakenly tend to perceive that prescribed fires are damaging to wildlife. The study recommends that fire education programs should seek "to counter common beliefs that fire usually results in high animal mortality, animal injury, and excessive habitat destruction" (Jacobson et al. 2001: 935) by providing evidence of positive wildlife outcomes from prescribed burning.

Toward this education effort, the park staff must emphasize, for instance, that it has safely performed three prescribed fires in Savannas Preserve scrub communities, and that during the most recent survey of Florida Scrub-jays, it was noted that individual birds were already using the newly restored areas (E. Cowan, Florida Park Service, unpubl. data). Such targeted educational efforts can also help to counter negative media portrayals of forest fires that reinforce and promote public fears and encourage fire suppression (see Jacobson et al. 2001). For instance, one news story about the March 2004 fire in the preserve, titled "Fire Rages Through Savannas" (Wood 2004), promoted the perception of fire as a wild threat to surrounding properties, while omitting the benefits of fire to plant and animal communities in the area, and the role fires play in reducing fuel loads. Monroe and Nelson (2004) note, however, that surveyed residents tended to trust expert opinion in relation to what they perceive as unreliable and sensationalist media accounts. Thus, a targeted, localized educational approach can help to spread a more positive message about the benefits of prescribed fires.

Conclusions

While many areas in Florida experience significant wildfire activity, a more broadly memorable example of the harm caused by suppressing fire is Yellowstone National Park and the catastrophic wildfires of 1988 (Turner et al. 2003). If fire had not been suppressed for so many years, many smaller fires would have occurred naturally, thereby reducing the high fuel loads, and the density of trees. Due to the previous suppression policies that kept fire from occurring naturally, in 1988 the fuel loads were so immense that devastating wildfires destroyed 400,235 hectares (989,000 acres) of forest, and countless infrastructure (Reice 2001). While catastrophic in impact, the Yellowstone fires in fact had many positive impacts, clearing litter from the ground and exposing the soils to sunlight again, which allowed many rare floral components to recolonize and reproduce naturally. The fires recreated the normal mosaic landscape of burned and unburned stands, and allowed some tree species to germinate for the first time in decades. The most significant problem in Yellowstone was not the catastrophic fires, but the old suppression policy, and erroneous public perceptions, which created the fire conditions that led to catastrophe (Reice 2001). The same problem occurs in Savannas and on public lands nationwide.

To face this challenge, the Florida Park Service in Savannas Preserve must make public education a primary concern when it comes to using prescribed fires to conserve endangered species, along with protecting public and private property. By providing the public with compelling evidence of the dangers of excess fuel loads near their homes, and of the importance of prescribed burning to endangered animals and plants, park managers may increasingly convince homeowners to accept the idea of allowing burns near their backyards. To implement an education program and get information to local residents, the Florida Park Service will be holding public meetings and conduct door-to-door consultations to explain the dangers associated with high fuel loads along with the need for prescribed fires to benefit endangered species conservation. Toward this end, the Florida Park Service and the Harriet L. Wilkes Honors College of Florida Atlantic University are united in a "Parknership" program aimed at educating students and the general public of the importance of ecosystem restoration and preservation. It remains to be seen whether or not this education process will alter the local politics of fire suppression; however, the future of endangered species in the area may depend on it.

Table 1. Distances from Savannas Preserve State
Park scrub high fuel loads to residential homes
and other infrastructure.

                                                        DISTANCE TO
STATION      NORTH                 WEST              NEAREST FUEL LOADS

1         27[degrees]16.076'   080[degrees]14.767'   No overgrown fuel
                                                           loads.

2         27[degrees]18.678'   080[degrees]15.783'   No overgrown fuel
                                                           loads.

3         27[degrees]18.941'   080[degrees]15.910'      Garage: 20m;
                                                         Home: 28m

4         27[degrees]18.942'   080[degrees]15.911'   Wooden Boat: 35m;
                                                         Home: 117m

5         27[degrees]19.319'   080[degrees]16.104'      No overgrown
                                                        fuel loads.

6         27[degrees]19.301'   080[degrees]16.084'      Trees: 19m;
                                                      Heavy equip:39m;
                                                       Home: too far
                                                        within heavy
                                                      brush to measure

7         27[degrees]19.467'   080[degrees]16.164'      Garage: 25m;
                                                         Home: 76m

8         27[degrees]19.471'   080[degrees]16.164'   Wooden fence: 23m;
                                                         Home: 29m

9         27[degrees]19.734'   080[degrees]16.272'   Wooden fence: 19m

10        27[degrees]19.896'   080[degrees]16.350'    Dense fuel: 45m

11        27[degrees]19.998'   080[degrees]16.399'      No overgrown
                                                        fuel loads.

12        27[degrees]20.003'   080[degrees]16.404'       Fuel; 99m

13        27[degrees]20.150'   080[degrees]16.457'   Fuel: Approx. 50m

14        27[degrees]20.439'   080[degrees]16.653'      Porch: 24m;
                                                         Home: 34m

15        27[degrees]20.670'   080[degrees]16.802'     Fence: 20.6m;
                                                        Boat: 22.4;
                                                         Shed.: 40m
                                                         Home: 175m

16        27[degrees]20.913'   080[degrees]16.921'      Fuel: 17.4m

17        27[degrees]21.252'   080[degrees]17.078'   Dense fuel: 16.2m

18        27[degrees]21.414'   080[degrees]17.154'      Fence: 18.6m

19        27[degrees]21.619'   080[degrees]17.250'      Fence: 51m;
                                                        Garage: 177m

20        27[degrees]21.931'   080[degrees]17.395'      Fuel: 15.6m

21        27[degrees]22.115'   080[degrees]17.477'   15.6m; Home: 77m;
                                                          Van: 58m

* Note: the fact that the brush obscured a laser
range finder reading attests to fuel thickness
within the private parcel.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Florida Park Service and the National Science Foundation for their support of interdisciplinary research collaborations between the Florida Park Service, FAU faculty, and undergraduate students.

Literature Cited

Alverson, W.S., W. Kuhlmann, and D.M. Waller. 1994. Wild Forests: Conservation Biology and Public Policy. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 300 pp.

Bolen, E. G., and W. L. Robinson. 2003. Wildlife Ecology and Management. Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. 634 pp.

Buckner, E.R., and N.L. Turrill. 1999. Fire management. Pp 329-347 in Ecosystem Management for Sustainability (J.D. Peine, Ed.). Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton. 500 pp.

Clute, K. 2000. Public Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Wildland Fire. in Communicator's Guide: Wildland Fire, National Interagency Fire Center. Internet site www.nifc.gov/ preved/comm_guide/wildfire/fire_15.html.; Accessed: Feb. 4. 2004.

Cowan, E. Unpubl. data. Florida Park Service Environmental Specialist. 2004.

Diemer, J. E. 1992. Gopher Tortoise. Pp. 123-127 in Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida Volume III. Amphibians and Reptiles. (P. E. Moler, Ed.). University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Engeman, R. M., H. T. Smith, R. Severson, M. Severson, S. A. Shwiff, B. Constantin, and D. Griffin. 2004. The amount and economic cost of feral swine damage to the last remnant of a basin marsh system in Florida. Journal for Nature Conservation 12: 143-147.

FDEP. 2003. "Savannas Preserve State Park Unit Management Plan". Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Park Service, Tallahassee, Florida. 35 pp.

FNAI. 1990. Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida. Florida Natural Areas Inventory and Florida Department of Natural Resources. Tallahassee, Florida. 97 pp.

Division of Forestry . 1997. Forest Fire Laws and Open Burning Regulations. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

Gardner, P. D., H. J. Cortner, and K. Widaman. 1987. The perceptions and policy response toward wildland fire hazards by urban homeowners. Landscape and Urban Planning 14: 163-172.

Haines, T. K., and R. L. Busby. 2001. Prescribed burning in the South: Trends, purpose, and barriers. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 25(4):149-153.

Herron, J. P. and A. G. Kirk (eds.). 1999. Human/ Nature: Biology, Culture, and Environmental History. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. 148 pp.

Jacobson, S. K., M. C. Monroe, and S. Marynowski. 2001. "Fire at the wildland interface: The influence of experience and mass media on public dnowledge, attitudes, and behavioral intentions. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29(3):929-937.

Layne, J. E. 1992. Florida Mouse. Pp. 250-264 in Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida Volume I. Mammals. (S. R. Humphrey, Ed.). University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 392 pp.

Long, A. J. 1999. Prescribed burning regulations in Florida. Document FOR 67, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. 5 pp. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/ FR/FR05500.pdf. Accessed: 25 March 2004.

Moler, P. E. 1992. Eastern Indigo Snake. Pp. 181-186 in Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida Volume III. Amphibians and Reptiles. (P. E. Moler, Ed.). University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 291 pp.

Monroe, M. C., and K.C. Nelson. 2004. The value of assessing public perceptions: Wildland fire and defensible space. Applied Environmental Education and Communication 3:109-117.

Myers, R. L. 1990. Scrub and High Pine. Pp. 150-174 in Ecosystems of Florida. (R.L. Myers, and J.J. Ewel, Eds.). University of Central Florida Press, Orlando. 765 pp.

Nelson, K.C., M. Monroe, J. F. Johnson, and A. Bowers. 2003. Public perceptions of defensible space and landscape values from Minnesota and Florida. Pp. 55-62 in Homeowners, Communities, and Wildfire: Science Findings from the National Fire Plan. (J. Lakes, Ed.). US Forest Service, North Central Research Station Gen. Tech. Report NC-231.

Pyne, S. J. 1982. Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 654 pp.

Pyne, S.J. 2003. Smokechasing. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 260 pp.

Reice, S.R. 2001. The Silver Lining: The Benefits of Natural Disasters. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 218 pp.

Turner, M.G., W.H. Romme, and D.B. Tinker. 2003. "Surprises and lessons from the 1988 Yellowstone fires". Frontiers of Ecological Environment 1(7): 351-358.

USFWS. 1999. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12.18 pp.

USFWS. 2004. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The Endangered Species Act of 1973. http:// endangered.fws.gov/esa.html. Accessed: 25 March 2004.

Van Murphy. 1988. Florida Division of Forestry, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Memorandum. 15 April 1988.

Wood, T. 2004. Treasure Coast Palm. The E.W. Scripps Co. Fire rages through Savannas. http:www.tcpalm.com/tcp/local_news/article/ html. Accessed: 14 April 2004.

Woolfenden, G.E., and J.W. Fitzpatrick. 1996. Florida Scrub-jay. Pp. 267-280 in Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida Vol. V: Birds (J.A. Rodgers, Jr., H.W. Kale II, and H.T. Smith, Eds.). University Press of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 688 pp.

Wright, H. A., and A. W. Bailey. 1982. Fire Ecology--United States and Southern Canada. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, New York. 501 pp. Figure Captions (figures are included separately in electronic (jpeg) format)

Diana Marti, (a) William O'Brien, (a) Henry T. Smith, (a,b) Jon A. Moore, (a) and Stephanie Fitchett (a)

(a) Harriet L. Wilkes Honors College Florida Atlantic University John D. MacArthur Campus 5353 Parkside Dr. Jupiter, FL 33458

(b) Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Park Service 13798 S.E. Federal Highway Hobe Sound, FL 33455