@article {bnh-5493, title = {Managing animals in disasters (MAiD) - improving preparedness, response and resilience through individual and organisational collaboration: Final Report 2017}, number = {476}, year = {2019}, month = {04/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The Managing Animals in Disasters (MAiD) project was a three-year research project focusing on the challenges for end users, stakeholders, and community members in preparing for, planning for, and responding to the needs of animals in emergencies. The aim of the project was to identify and build best practice approaches to animal emergency management (AEM) to enable engagement with animal owners and other stakeholders in disasters and emergencies.

}, keywords = {animals, Disaster management, Fire, Natural hazards}, author = {Mel Taylor} } @article {bnh-4573, title = {Animal emergency management in South Australia: a case study of the Sampson Flat bushfire}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management }, volume = {33}, year = {2018}, month = {04/2018}, chapter = {60}, keywords = {animals, disaster management., Emergency management, sampson flat}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-jan-2018-animal-emergency-management-in-south-australia-a-case-study-of-the-sampson-flat-bushfire/}, author = {Mel Taylor and Megan McCarthy} } @article {bnh-4690, title = {Bushfire Preparedness, Planning, and Response among Animal Guardians: A South Australian Case Study}, journal = {PLOS Current Disasters}, year = {2018}, month = {08/2018}, abstract = {

Animal ownership has been identified as a risk factor for human survivability of natural disasters. Animal guardians have been reported to react or act in ways that may put their own safety and that of emergency services personnel at risk when faced with a natural disaster. Recent research has suggested that this risk factor could be reconfigured as a protective factor, whereby desires to save animals from natural disaster harm could motivate increased planning and preparedness behaviours amongst animal guardians. However, there has been no research to determine if bushfire planning and response behaviours differ between pet owners with low and high attachment; and how the relationship may differ in relation to small or large animals. Methods and procedure: We investigated the relationship between people{\textquoteright}s emotional attachment to different types of pets and their preparation and actions during the Pinery bushfire in South Australia in November 2015. Thirty-four people who were impacted by the fire participated in an online survey. Data were collected about their preparedness, planning and response behaviours as well as their animal attachment (high or low). Results: We identified 10 characteristics (behaviours, attributes, skills and beliefs) associated with high animal attachment scores, and eight associated with low animal attachment scores. Discussion: Our discussion of the differences in demographics, preparedness, planning and response characteristics of participants with high and low animal attachment confirms research suggesting that animal guardians take risks to save their animals during disasters. Our findings also support recent propositions that animal attachment and ownership could be used to increase the natural disaster preparedness and survivability of animal guardians. However, making sure that animal attachment functions as a protective factor requires active and effective intervention through education, behaviour change and social marketing strategies. Whilst our study is high in ecological validity, future research with larger samples sizes is required to determine the generalisability of our findings to animal owners and guardians in other locations, facing fires with other characteristics, especially for owners and guardians with low levels of attachment.

}, keywords = {animals, disasters, Emergency management, Planning, Preparedness, response.}, doi = {10.6084}, url = {http://currents.plos.org/disasters/article/bushfire-preparedness-planning-and-response-among-animal-guardians-a-south-australian-case-study/}, author = {O{\textquoteright}Dwyer, Lisel and Kirrilly Thompson} } @article {bnh-1691, title = {What{\textquoteright}s the Big Deal? Responder Experiences of Large Animal Rescue in Australia}, journal = {PLOS Currents Disasters}, year = {2015}, month = {01/2015}, abstract = {

Background: The management of large animals during disasters and emergencies creates difficult operational environments for responders. The aims of this study were to identify the exact challenges faced by Australian emergency response personnel in their interactions with large animals and their owners, and to determine the readiness for large animal rescue (LAR) in Australia.

Methods: A survey tool collected the views and experiences of a broad cross section of emergency services personnel operating across Australia and across all hazards. Data were collected from 156 responders including Australian emergency services personnel, emergency managers such as federal agricultural departments, and local government.

Results: Overall, many of the respondents had serious concerns, and felt that there were significant issues in relation to LAR in Australia. These included the coordination of emergency care for animals, physical management of large animals, inter-agency coordination, and dealing with animal owners. Very few respondents had received any formal training in LAR, with an overwhelming majority indicating they would attend formal training if it were made available.

Discussion: Results help to guide the development of evidence-informed support tools to assist operational response and community engagement, and the production of professional development resources.

}, keywords = {animals, disasters, emergencies, readiness, rescue}, doi = {10.1371/currents.dis.71d34082943fa239dbfbf9597232c8a5}, url = {http://currents.plos.org/disasters/article/whats-the-big-deal-responder-experiences-of-large-animal-rescue-in-australia/}, author = {Bradley P Smith and Kirrilly Thompson and Mel Taylor} }