Ecocultural monitoring reveals low impact of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s) guwiyang (fire) in an urban national park, Australia

Ecocultural monitoring reveals low impact of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s) guwiyang (fire) in an urban national park, Australia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Ecocultural monitoring reveals low impact of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s) guwiyang (fire) in an urban national park, Australia Gabrielle Brennan, Jo Anne Rey, Hsing-Chung Chang, Emilie Ens This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 18 Nov, 2025 Read the published version in Urban Ecosystems → Version 1 posted 16 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Indigenous-led fire stewardship is increasingly recognised as important for ecological and cultural resilience; however, remains rare in urban landscapes due to regulatory barriers, fear and risk aversion. This study aligned with the first Dharug dhiyina (women’s)-led guwiyang (fire) since European invasion of Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (Brown’s Waterhole) some 230 years ago, in what is now the urban Lane Cove National Park, Sydney. Using a collaborative cross-cultural monitoring approach, we evaluated ecological parameters before and after the guwiyang and at three control sites: a modified BACI design. We assessed fuel loads, fire and soil properties, and culturally significant plants and mammals. The low-intensity, patchy guwiyan g had low flame height, slow rate of spread, and significantly reduced surface, near-surface and elevated fuel loads. Following the guwiyang , we observed basal resprouting of the culturally significant medicinal plant Dybung/Mambara (Geebung, Persoonia linearis ). As desired by the Dharug women, dominant species, Daynya ( Dodonaea triquetra ) and Gurgi ( Pteridium esculentum; Calochlaena dubia ) significantly declined post-burn, with short-term regrowth. No significant change was detected in soil properties or activity of Burraga (long-nosed bandicoot, Perameles nasuta ) or Bagarayi (swamp wallaby, Wallabia bicolor ), indicating low guwiyang impact, consistent with the intent of the Dharug guwiyang for the dense urban woodland context. This study of a rare Indigenous-led cultural burn in an urban setting demonstrates the mechanics of a cross-cultural partnership that adopted a two-way science approach. We combined Indigenous values and Western science to provide evidence of reduced fuel loads and low ecological impact of the guwiyang . Such studies can abate the fear surrounding fire in urban ecosystems, especially those managed by Indigenous custodians. With growing wildfire risks linked to climate change, cross-cultural collaborations offer valuable pathways for ecological and cultural resilience in urban areas. Indigenous fire management gendered conservation urban-bushland interface First Nations conservation biocultural conservation two-eyed seeing Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Positionality Statement This research was undertaken by a team comprising both Indigenous (Rey) and non-Indigenous Australian researchers (Brennan, Ens, Chang), all affiliated with the university sector who listened and learnt from Dharug Ngurra (Country) as the senior author of this research. The team included expertise from the biological sciences (Brennan, Ens, Chang) and Indigenous research (Rey), informed by each authors longstanding cross-cultural collaborative research partnerships in other contexts. Through this research, we intended to elevate the eco-cultural value of Indigenous fire practices through two-way learning and to enable two-eyed seeing. While we seek to honour and support Indigenous knowledge systems and Dharug Ngurra, we acknowledge that we do not speak on behalf of the values or practices of Dharug custodians and other Dharug Ngurra outside of the study team and location. 1. Introduction Indigenous urban fire management Following centuries of the pervasive global to local impacts of European imperialism and colonisation, Indigenous groups worldwide are increasingly reinstating traditional or cultural conservation practices, including fire management (Russell-Smith et al., 2013 ; Ngurra et al., 2019 ; Fletcher et al., 2021 ; Hoffman et al., 2022 ; Díaz et al., 2023 ; Rey et al., 2025 ). However, significant barriers remain, as in contemporary settings, fire management is highly regulated to protect infrastructure and assets, and arguably to prevent large, destructive wildfires (Smith et al., 2021 ; Williamson, 2022 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ). Within urban-bushland interfaces, where native remnant bushland is situated adjacent to densely settled communities, the perceived threat and potential danger of fire is amplified (Bradstock et al., 1998 ; Darques, 2015 ; Bento-Gonçalves & Vieira, 2020 ). This has contributed to substantial risk-aversion in urban fire and vegetation management decision-making. In colonised nations such as Australia, Canada, and the Unites States of America, such caution is further shaped by colonial-era fear of fire and the systematic exclusion and suppression of Indigenous peoples and their land stewardship practices (Lake & Christianson, 2020 ; Freeman et al., 2021 ; Smith et al., 2021 ; Hoffman et al., 2022 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ). Indigenous scholars and allies emphasise the ecological and cultural (ecocultural) benefits of decolonising fire management policies in contemporary settings and revitalising nuanced Indigenous fire practices and knowledges that have shaped landscapes for millennia (Bowman & Panton, 1995 ; Russell-Smith et al., 2013 ; Neale et al., 2019 ; McKemey et al., 2022 ; Pascoe et al., 2023 ). Indigenous fire management across many parts of the world reflects broader responsibilities of cultural stewardship, including caring for Country, sustaining resources, and facilitating access to cultural sites (Lake & Christianson, 2020 ; Fletcher et al., 2021 ). In sparsely populated and geographically remote areas, Indigenous groups have been able to maintain and revitalise traditional fire practices to a greater extent than in urban landscapes, where land access, legal recognition, and structural barriers have limited such opportunities (Williamson & Weir, 2021 ; Hoffman et al., 2022 ; Williamson, 2022 ). In Australia, this is evident in central and northern regions, where many Indigenous communities have been able to maintain strong access to ancestral lands and opportunities to practice customary traditions, including traditional burning (Russell-Smith et al., 1997 ; Ansell & Evans, 2019 ; Williamson, 2022 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ). Research within these regions highlights the ecological, cultural, social, and economic benefits of maintaining traditional fire management practices in contemporary settings (see Vigilante & Bowman, 2004 ; Russell-Smith et al., 2009 ; Bird et al., 2018 ; Legge et al., 2024 ). By contrast, south-eastern Australian Indigenous communities face greater barriers to traditional fire management practice. However, despite constraints, Indigenous fire knowledge persists within urban and regional communities and is being actively revitalised, though often on a smaller scale (Steffensen, 2020 ; Freeman et al., 2021 ; Cavanagh, 2022 ; Pascoe et al., 2023 ; Rey et al., 2025 ). Some of this activity has been documented in the academic literature (e.g., McKemey et al., 2019 ; Neale et al., 2019 ; Ngurra et al., 2019 ; Freeman et al., 2021 ; Cavanagh, 2022 ; Atkinson & Montiel-Molina, 2023 ; Weir, 2023 ; Bowd et al., 2025 ; Rey et al., 2025 ), although it is important to acknowledge that many burns conducted by Indigenous Peoples are not documented in mainstream publicly accessible platforms. Additionally, there is an increasing movement towards reinstating women’s-led cultural burning, acknowledging that Indigenous women historically played vital roles in fire management and environmental stewardship, shaped by their gendered cultural responsibilities and ecological knowledge (Bird et al., 2004 ; Tynan & Cavanagh, 2021 ; Cavanagh, 2022 ; Brennan et al., 2024; Rey et al., 2025 ). Raising awareness of Indigenous women’s-led burning is noted as particularly important given the limited research on the roles of Indigenous women in cultural burning, especially in south-eastern Australia, which likely reflects prevailing patriarchal processes (Cavanagh, 2022 ). Moreover, the disproportionate recognition and involvement of women in broader natural resource management due to colonial and gendered barriers (Sithole et al., 2008 ; James et al., 2021 ) is gaining increasing recognition, a gap which the present project and associated research aimed to address. Benefits of cross-cultural monitoring Effective monitoring and communication of conservation outcomes, in this case from Indigenous women’s-led cultural burning, can enhance understanding and foster broader receptiveness and support (Robinson et al., 2018 ; Ansell & Evans, 2019 ), particularly in urban landscapes where cultural practices have been significantly disrupted or suppressed (David et al., 2024 ). Similar to the process of burning itself, monitoring can also be decolonised to reflect and highlight Indigenous values, knowledge systems, and approaches to caring for Country (Danielsen et al., 2005 ; McKemey et al., 2019 ; Skroblin et al., 2022 ). Moreover, research indicates that increased collaboration between Indigenous Peoples and Western-trained scientists can deliver enhanced cross-cultural learning and conservation outcomes (Ens et al., 2015 ; Eloy et al., 2019 ; Bourke et al., 2020 ; Fletcher et al., 2021 ). Cross-cultural, two-way, right-way or two-eyed seeing approaches that combine Indigenous and Western knowledge systems and methods offer space for more genuine and respectful collaborations and inclusion (Bartlett et al., 2012 ; Ens et al., 2015 ; Ens & Turpin, 2022 ; McKemey et al., 2022 ). Although cultural burning remains rare in urban settings, Australian (McKemey et al., 2022 ; Bowd et al., 2025 ; Ngurra et al., 2025 ) and international examples (Christianson, 2014 ; Nikolakis & Ross, 2022 ) demonstrate how cross-cultural partnerships and effective monitoring can promote ecological, cultural, and social outcomes and abate the fear associated with fire in nearby habitats. For example, in central regional Victoria, Australia, the Dja Dja Wurrung have collaborated with bushfire management agencies to reactivate cultural burning through cross-cultural partnerships through “decolonising experiments” in fire management (Neale et al., 2019 ). Similarly, on the New South Wales tablelands, cross-cultural monitoring by Banbai people and scientists demonstrated that low-intensity cultural burning had less impact on the foraging activity of the culturally significant short-beaked echidna ( Tachyglossus aculeatus ) and the mortality of Backwater grevillea ( Grevillea scortechinii subsp. sarmentosa ) than nearby prescribed burns (McKemey et al., 2019 ; McKemey et al., 2021 ). On the southeast coast of Australia, cultural burning has also been shown to have positive effects on soil health, such as facilitating the input of organic matter and increasing soil moisture, which in turn impacted overall ecosystem responses (Country et al., 2024 ). Internationally, Indigenous groups like the Yunesit’in in North America, have applied collaborative approaches by drawing on deep ecological knowledge and “learning by doing” to restore fire practices following colonial disruptions (Nikolakis & Ross, 2022 ). On Secwépemc territory in North America (British Columbia), collaborative research found that low-severity burns undertaken by Secwépemc people were linked to greater richness of culturally significant plant species, highlighting the role of traditional fire practices in sustaining valued resources (Dickson-Hoyle et al., 2024 ). All these examples demonstrate the benefits of cross-cultural approaches to monitoring Indigenous-led fire; however, we could find no examples for urban ecosystems. Exploring cultural guwiyang (fire) in urban landscapes Despite the growth of Indigenous cultural burning in remote and regional contexts, there remains a dearth of burning and associated research in urban landscapes, including southeastern Australia (Neale et al., 2019 ; Pascoe et al., 2023 ; Rawluk et al., 2023 ). Novel approaches to urban biodiversity management are crucial, as these areas face disproportionately high species loss due to habitat fragmentation, invasive species, altered fire regimes, and urban encroachment (Fitzgibbon et al., 2011 ; Kirkpatrick et al., 2023 ). In the fragmented environments of Sydney, Australia, conservation of small, ground-dwelling animals such as the long-nosed bandicoot ( Perameles nasuta ), in part, requires the maintenance of habitat mosaics that include dense refuges and open foraging areas; conditions that were likely historically sustained by fire (Scott et al., 1999 ). Despite urban encroachment, remnant habitat patches serve as critical refuges for native species. For instance, southern brown bandicoots ( Isoodon obesulus obesulus ) have persisted in human-modified landscapes and may benefit from repeated low-intensity burns, although foraging may initially decline after fire (Maclagan et al., 2018 ; Kirkpatrick et al., 2023 ). Such studies highlight a complex interplay between fire frequency, habitat condition and urban pressures, reinforcing the need to consider cultural burning as a nuanced fire management strategy in fragmented urban-bushland interfaces. Cultural guwiyang around the global city of Sydney In the Sydney Basin, early European colonial records and palaeoecological studies indicate that prior to European colonisation, Indigenous Dharug people and neighbouring groups used fire to manage their ancestral clan estates (Clark & McLoughlin, 1986 ; Kohen, 1986 ; McLoughlin, 1998 ; Black & Mooney, 2007 ; Gammage, 2013 ; Jurskis & Underwood, 2013 ). Following European colonisation, cultural fire practices were widely suppressed across south eastern Australia (Cahir et al., 2018 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ), including within the Sydney Basin, where burning largely ceased (Attenbrow, 2010 ). This was likely a result of the dispossession of local Indigenous groups from their lands and the disruption of cultural practices (Brook & Kohen, 1991 ; Karskens, 2009 ). Despite these significant impacts on traditional custodial responsibilities, Dharug are reigniting and continuing cultural practices across Ngurra (Country), including restoring guwiyang (fire) as a deliberate act of restorative healing for Ngurra and the community (Ngurra et al., 2019 ; Rey et al., 2025 ). The present study focused on the recent revitalisation of Indigenous cultural burning in Sydney, where such actions and research remain sparse, especially concerning the contributions of Indigenous women (Cavanagh, 2022 ; Rey et al. 2025 ). Through a cross-cultural collaboration between Dharug women and university scientists at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (Brown’s Waterhole), Walumadagal Ngurra , this study explored the ecocultural responses of ‘other-than-human’ (biophysical) landscape elements to a low-intensity Dharug dhiyina (women’s)-led cultural burn (see Appendix 1 for a glossary of Dharug terms). The Dharug dhiyina identified the following key objectives for the burn: (1) Create a low intensity fire to minimise ecological impacts while reducing fuel loads for wildfire mitigation; (2) Protect culturally significant plant species, such as Dybung/Mambara (narrow-leaved geebung, Persoonia linearis ), and reduce the dominance of Daynya (common hop bush, Dodonaea triquetra ) and Gurgi (bracken ferns, Pteridium esculentum; Calochlaena dubia ); (3) Understand the fire’s influence on soil properties; and (4) Ensure minimal impacts on fauna, with a focus on the culturally important mammal species: Burraga (long-nosed bandicoot, Perameles nasuta ) and Bagarayi (swamp wallaby, Wallabia bicolor ). 2. Methods 2.1. Co-developing cross-cultural approaches In 2023, the Dharug Women’s and Allies Cultural Fire Alliance (DWACFA) invited non-Indigenous researchers (Authors GB, EE, MC) to assist with cross-cultural monitoring of ‘other-than-human’ outcomes of a cultural guwiyang led by Dharug dhiyina . This research complements prior socio-cultural research led by Dharug researcher and author JR (Rey, 2022 ), as well as previous and ongoing Dharug-led cultural burns in western Sydney (Ngurra et al., 2019 ; Ngurra et al., 2025 ). The co-development of the cross-cultural monitoring program occurred through a series of yarning sessions (see Bessarab & Ng'Andu, 2010 ) between JR, EE, MC and GB. These discussions focused on key interests and questions raised by the DWACFA regarding the proposed cultural burn, building on exploratory biocultural monitoring previously conducted by the DWACFA, which included recording edible, medicinal, and useful plants and animals using electronic data collection software CyberTracker (Liebenberg, 2012 ), alongside camera traps. Through these yarning sessions, we identified specific Dharug interests and aspirations for ‘other-than-human’ responses to the proposed guwiyang , such as soil, fauna and useful Dharug plants. 2.2. Study sites The Dharug-led cultural guwiyang was undertaken in April 2024 at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , Lane Cove National Park (LCNP), in north-west Sydney, Australia (Fig. 1 ). This site holds cultural significance and ancestral connection for the co-author JR (Rey, 2021 ). It is also an important urban habitat refuge for threatened plant and fauna species (Reidy et al., 2005 ), within an urban residential and light commercial zone adjacent to Macquarie University (Office of Environment and Heritage, 2016 ). The planned cultural guwiyang area was relatively small, as Dharug dhiyina wanted to tread slowly to avoid instilling fear, and target the dominant Daynya and Gurgi . Hence, the study area reflected this aim and covered a 30mx30m area. To assess ‘other-than-human’ responses to the Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (impact site) guwiyang , we compared characteristics to three adjacent control sites. Control sites were selected within 2km of the burn site in LCNP and between 300-900m apart (access dependent), with similar habitat/vegetation type, aspect, slope, and proximity to the Lane Cove River (~ 20m) (Fig. 1 ). This approach followed the modified BACI (Before-After, Control-Impact) monitoring design of Underwood ( 1994 ) for a single impact site and multiple control sites (Pardini et al., 2018 ). The study was located within the Sydney Enriched Sandstone Moist Forest (sclerophyll) vegetation type (Fig. 1 ; DCCEEW, 2020 ). The soil is primarily classified as rudosol, characterised by well-drained sand and gravel composition (Department of Planning, 2021). Dominant tree species included: Sydney peppermint ( Eucalyptus piperita ), red bloodwood ( Corymbia gummifera ), Sydney red gum ( Angophora costata ) and blackbutt ( Eucalyptus pilularis ). Mid-storey species included: Dybung/Mambara (broad-leaved geebung, Persoonia levis; narrow-leaved geebung, Persoonia linearis ), linear-leaf grevillea ( Grevilliea linerifolia ), blueberry ash ( Elaeocarpus reticulatus ) and Gulgadya (broadleaf grass-tree, Xanthorrhoea arborea; grass tree, Xanthorrhoea media ). Dominant ground cover species were: Gurgi , Bamuru (spiny-headed mat-rush, Lomandra longifolia ), pithy sword-sedge ( Lepidosperma laterale ), Warabura (sweet sarsaparilla, Smilax glyciphylla ) and snake vine ( Stephania japonica ). At the burn site, Daynya was dominant in the mid-ground story in some areas. Daynya is known to occupy disturbed sites (Country et al., 2024 ). Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (Brown’s Waterholewas partially burnt 5 years prior to the cultural guwiyang during an arson-related bushfire in 2019. This followed a prescribed burn conducted across the entire site in 2018. Before these events, the site had not experienced fire for 16 years (Table 1 ). Two control sites, Middle Site and Devlin’s Creek, were last burned by prescribed fires in 2018 and 2010, respectively. Additionally, all sites had been impacted by bushfire in 2001/2002. According to JR, the proposed cultural burn at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru was “an historic cultural burn… It's the first time since the early colonial period that Dharug have burnt there”. Table 1 Fire histories and time since last fire of each monitoring site, including bushfires (BF) and prescribed burns (PB) (DCCEEW, 2010 ). Site Name Fire Histories Time Since Last Fire (from 2024) Terry’s Creek 2002 (BF) 22 years Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru 2019 (BF), 2018 (PB), 2002 (BF) 5 years Middle Site 2018 (PB), 2002 (BF), 1993/1994 (BF) 6 years Devlin’s Creek 2010 (PB), 2002 (BF), 1993/1994 (BF), 1976 (BF) 13 years 2.3. Cultural burn process Throughout the cultural journey, several stakeholder days were held before the burn, engaging the Dharug community and local river ‘neighbours’ (see Rey et al., 2025 ), as shown in Fig. 2 . These events served as important communication channels and opportunities for relationship-building between the Dharug and non-Indigenous residents and stakeholders, thereby supporting the cultural guwiyang process. Prior to the cultural burn, DWACFA ran a four-day workshop in March 2024 (Fig. 2 ), which involved cultural preparations for the site. One week before the cultural burn, the Dharug dhiyina trimmed the Daynya stems (from ~ 2m to ~ 50 cm) to reduce the fuel load and likelihood of intense burning, as they wanted to impart a ‘cool’ traditional cultural burn. The cultural burn was undertaken across four days in late April 2024, led by the DWACFA, with other Dharug, Indigenous and non-Indigenous community members, stakeholders, and New South Wales government National Parks and Wildlife Service staff. As outlined in Rey et al. ( 2025 ), Dharug dhiyina led the burn, beginning at the highest point of the site (west) and moving across in groups, using multiple ignition points to create fire mosaic patches or circles. Rake hoes were used to create containment lines and control the fire. Rain in the weeks leading up to the burn (Fig. 3 ), meant that the fuel was moist and the vegetation and leaf litter was difficult to ignite and hence, spread slowly. As the temperature increased as the sun passed over the site, the fire spread more easily. Some plants species, such as Gurgi , were especially slow to catch fire, requiring encouragement to alight through dried Gulgadya leaves (Rey et al., 2025 ). Some of the previously cut Daynya stems did not fully burn. Average wind speed was 17.25 km/h in the morning and 16.25 km/h in the afternoon, with a mean maximum temperature of 23°C and minimum of 12.4°C over the four days (Bureau of Meteorology, 2025 ). There was also substantial rain in the week following the burn (~ 13.26 mm) (Fig. 3 ). 2.4. Biocultural monitoring At each impact and control site, we established six 15x10m 2 grids with three nested 1m 2 quadrats in each grid cell using randomly generated coordinates (Fig. 4 ). The following assessments were undertaken within this schema. 2.4.1. Cultural guwiyang assessment To assess fuel hazard changes at the impact site before and after the guwiyang , leaf litter depth (mm) was measured using a ruler within each quadrat. Additionally, percentage vegetation cover below 2 m was visually estimated as a measure of near-surface (≤ 0.6 m) and elevated (0.6–2 m) fuel strata, as defined by Hines et al. ( 2010 ). These low-mid storey cover data were combined into a single metric for rapid assessment. At nine to ten ignition points on each of the three burn days, we measured: (1) the rate of spread (how many metres the fire moved in one-minute); and (2) the visually estimated flame height at each ignition point (McStephen, 2014 ; AFAC, 2015 ). Following the burn, we measured scorch height and proportion of area burned (patchiness) in each 1 m 2 quadrat ( n = 18) (Ooi et al., 2006 ; McStephen, 2014 ; McKemey et al., 2019 ). 2.4.2. Dharug plant surveys Dharug plant surveys were conducted before (early April 2024) and after the guwiyang (mid-July 2024) (Fig. 2 ). Dharug collaborators identified the following three plant species of interest for the fire response monitoring: Daynya , Gurgi and Dybung/Mambara (narrow-leaved geebung, Persoonia linearis ). Within the 1m 2 quadrats, we counted living Daynya stems and estimated Gurgi frond percentage cover. Within each grid cell, we assessed culturally valued and fire responsive Dharug bushfood/medicine Dybung/Mambara (Morrison & Renwick, 2000 ) by counting the number of resprouting shoots at the base of adult plants (Morrison & Renwick, 2000 ; Benwell, 2024 ), with cluster of shoots counted as one. 2.4.3. Soil properties Soil samples were taken at randomly generated locations within each grid cell at each site, one week before and one week following the guwiyang (Fig. 2 ). Soil samples were collected using a 10cm steel core ring and placed in sealed plastic bags and stored at 4°C prior to analysis. From each sample, a 50 g sub-sample was weighed and oven-dried at 105°C for four days, then re-weighed to determine soil water content (differential weighing method; (O’Kelly, 2004 ). After weighing 10 g sub-samples, rocks and organic material (e.g., leaf debris, twigs) were removed, and the remaining soil was finely ground. From this, we measured carbon content (loss on ignition), pH and electrical conductivity. For loss on ignition, 3g of soil was placed in a crucible, heated at 550°C for four hours, and re-weighed (Hoogsteen et al., 2015 ). pH and electrical conductivity were measured from a 1:5 soil-to-water solution (5 g soil:25 g water) using a Multi-parameter PCSTestr 35 probe. 2.4.5. Fauna survey Camera traps were used to detect ground-dwelling Dharug target animals across four survey periods: six months before (September/October 2023), six weeks before (March/April 2024), immediately after (May/June 2024) and three months after (July/August 2024) the guwiyang (Fig. 2 ). Six Reconyx HP2W cameras were deployed at each site with one placed in each grid cell, approximately 15m apart, for 35 trap days per period. Cameras were fixed to trees, and vegetation was cleared directly in front of the camera to avoid false triggers. Cameras were set to white flash, capturing three pictures per second with high sensitivity. Cameras were placed 40cm above ground and facing down at a 45 degree angle (Meek et al., 2012 ; Gigliotti et al., 2022 ). A peanut butter, honey and oat lure was used in a PVC pipe bait station (Paull et al., 2011 ), mounted on a star picket with cable ties, and placed 1.2m from the camera. An active ‘lure’ survey approach was adopted, to increase likelihood of animal detection and strengthen data analysis (following Miritis et al., 2024 ; Watchorn et al., 2024 ). Fauna monitoring methods were approved by Macquarie University Animal Ethics Committee (Reference number: 520251964364056) and consent for monitoring was approved by NSW National Parks and Wildlife Services (Reference number: DOC22/1022834). 2.5. Data analysis During the Dharug guwiyang , one grid cell did not burn, so only five cells from each monitoring grid were used for each site to balance the data. Statistical tests were dependent on data characteristics, including distribution, sample size, and study design (see Supplementary Table S1 for a summary of statistical analysis type). All analyses were undertaken using R Studio (Version 12.1; R Core Team, 2024 ). 2.5.1. Fire intensity and fuel hazard analysis At the impact site, paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to assess differences in leaf litter depth and vegetation cover below 2m, and means were interpreted against fuel hazard strata thresholds defined by Hines et al. ( 2010 ). Fire intensity measures were averaged across samples and reported as means with standard error and sample size. Observed fire intensity was determined using standard fire monitoring codes developed by McStephen ( 2014 ). 2.5.2. Plant analysis Dybung/Mambara reshooting stems were log-transformed and analysed using linear mixed effects models (grid number as random effect), to assess any differences between the impact site and two of the three control sites where they were present. Residual diagnostics were conducted to evaluate assumptions of normality and homoscedasticity, alongside a Shapiro–Wilk test for normality of residuals. To compare living Daynya stem counts and Gurgi frond cover before and after the fire, we used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, given the non-normal distribution of the data and the repeated-measures design. These were only analysed at the impact site, Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , as they were limited at the control sites, and the Dharug dhiyina wished to understand whether this species would decline in abundance after the cultural burn. 2.5.3. Soil analysis Each soil property (pH, EC, soil moisture and carbon content) was analysed individually using linear mixed effects models (grid number as random effect) to assess any potential impact of the guwiyang compared to all control sites. Residual diagnostics were conducted to evaluate assumptions of normality and homoscedasticity for each model. Additionally, Shapiro–Wilk tests were used to test for normality of residuals. 2.5.4. Fauna analysis For each animal detection, camera trap images were tagged with date, event duration (start and end time) and species ( Bagarayi (Swamp wallaby; Wallabia bicolor ) and Burraga (Long-nosed bandicoot; Perameles nasuta )). Given the close proximity of cameras within each site and the small scale of the burn, we pooled detections from all cameras within a site to avoid pseudo-replication and overinflating detection estimates. For each site, daily species detections were aggregated and recorded as present (1) or absent (0) per day within each survey period (Miritis et al., 2024 ). Presence/absence data were aggregated across survey periods, with the response variable defined as species activity (Parkins et al., 2019 ; Miritis et al., 2024 ; Watchorn et al., 2024 ) that was calculated as the number of days present divided by the total number of days within each survey period. To assess whether Burraga and Bagarayi activity responded to the guwiyang , we employed generalised linear models (GLMs) with binomial errors and a logit link function for each species (Bolker et al., 2009 ; Pardini et al., 2018 ). The model tested whether the interaction between survey period and treatment type (the BACI effect) explained significant variation in species activity (as in Pardini et al., 2018 ). The two pre-burn surveys were grouped as ‘before’ and the two post-burn surveys as ‘after’. In the model, Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru was specified as the impact site and used as the reference level, while the three control sites were included individually to enable direct comparisons. All models were fit using the glm function from base R. The significance of fixed effects was assessed using Type III Wald’s χ² tests (likelihood ratio tests) using the car package (Bolker et al., 2009 ; Fox & Weisberg, 2018 ). Model fit was evaluated using McFadden’s R², calculated with the pscl and performance packages. Assumptions were assessed using DHARMa package to examine residual distributions and check for overdispersion. Post hoc pairwise comparisons of estimated marginal means were conducted using the emmeans package to test before-after changes within each site. 3. Results 3.1. Cultural guwiyang intensity and fuel hazard assessment Following Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang , there was a significant reduction in surface fine fuel loads (V = 114, p = 0.002); mean leaf litter depth declined from 30.3 mm (± 10.6mm SE, n = 15) to 8.3 mm (± 9.4mm SE, n = 15). According to Hines et al. ( 2010 ), this shift reflected a reduction in surface fuel hazard from high (≥ 20 mm) to low (< 10 mm). Similarly, mean vegetation cover below 2 m decreased from 58.0% (± 19.8% SE) to 19.0% (± 12.4% SE), a significant reduction in vertical fine fuel strata (V = 119, p = 0.0009). Based on cover thresholds, this corresponded to a decline in fuel hazard from high (> 50%) to low–moderate (10–40%) across the near-surface and elevated fuel strata (Hines et al., 2010 ). During the burn, the estimated mean flame height was 0.96m (± 0.1 SE, n = 28) and the rate of spread was 0.48m/minute (± 0.04m SE, n = 28). On average, 52.67% (± 7.74% SE, n = 15) of each quadrat was burnt and the mean scorch height was 1.1m (± 0.19m SE, n = 15). According to protocols outlined by McStephen ( 2014 ), the observed fire intensity was low, as it was patchy, did not remove all the litter and ground stratum, and there was very low scorch with no canopy scorch. 3.2. Dharug plant responses There were significantly more Dybung/Mambara shoots after the guwiyang (β = -0.88, SE = 0.20, p < 0.001). The interaction effect indicated that the before-after changes at Devlin’s Creek (β = 0.72, SE = 0.29, p = 0.021) and Terry’s Creek (β = 0.88, SE = 0.29, p = 0.006) were significantly different from the impact site. Post hoc results showed no significant change at Devlin’s Creek or Terry’s Creek ( p > 0.4), indicating that the observed increase was confined to the Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang site. After the guwiyang , significant reductions in living Daynya stems (V = 28, p = 0.022) and Gurgi frond cover (V = 75, p = 0.005) were detected. However, new Gurgi fronds were observed within weeks after the fire. 3.3. Dharug soil responses Soil moisture increased at all sites following the guwiyang , including at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru where the increase was statistically significant (β = − 10.5, SE = 3.11, p = 0.002; Fig. 5 ). However, no significant interaction was found between site and survey period, indicating that similar increases were also observed at control sites (Devlin’s Creek: β = 4.99, p = 0.27; Middle Site: β = 5.47, p = 0.22; Terry’s Creek: β = 4.30, p = 0.34). No significant changes were detected in soil carbon, pH, or electrical conductivity after the guwiyang at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , and no significant interaction effects were found between site and survey period, indicating that any variation observed at the impact site was comparable to that at control sites (Fig. 5 ; see Supplementary Table S2 for full model outputs). 3.3. Dharug fauna responses We found no substantial effect of the guwiyang on either target fauna species over the study period compared to the control sites. Burraga activity before and after the Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang did not significantly differ from other sites (χ² = 2.54, df = 3, p = 0.468). Model-estimated activity probabilities showed a significant decline in Burraga activity across all sites (Fig. 6 ; see Supplementary Table S3 for full model outputs). At Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , activity dropped sharply ( p = 0.0002), representing an ~ 8.6-fold reduction. Similar but less pronounced declines were observed at the control sites: Devlin’s Creek declined ~ 2.7-fold ( p = 0.045); Middle Site ~ 4.1-fold ( p = 0.017); and Terry’s Creek ~ 4.5-fold ( p = 0.011). DHARMa residual diagnostics indicated no evidence of overdispersion or poor model fit. The model explained 34.6% of the variance in Burraga activity (McFadden’s R 2 ), indicating a moderately strong fit. Changes in Bagarayi activity before and after the guwiyang differed between sites (χ² = 16.70, df = 3, p < 0.001) (Fig. 6 ). At Middle Site, activity was reduced by nearly half (p < 0.001). In contrast, there were no significant differences before-after fire at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (~ 1.3-fold, p = 0.177), Devlin’s Creek (~ 1.2-fold decline, p = 0.309) or Terry’s Creek (~ 1.1-fold decline, p = 0.396). Residual diagnostics confirmed appropriate model fit and no overdispersion. The model explained 20.6% of the variance in Bagarayi activity (McFadden’s R 2 ). 4. Discussion Cultural guwiyang in urban landscapes Despite growing international interest in and application of Indigenous cultural burning for ecological and cultural purposes, there is a paucity of burning and associated research in urban landscapes. The present paper addresses this research gap through cross-cultural monitoring of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s)-led cultural guwiyang (fire) event in the urban-bushland interface of Lane Cove National Park, Sydney, Australia. Ecocultural responses of the ‘other-than-humans’ were varied and nuanced, but overall provided evidence for the low ecological impact of the cultural guwiyang at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (Brown’s Waterhole), aligning with the Dharug dhiyina objectives for the burn (Rey et al., 2025 ) and other existing yet limited studies in south-eastern Australia (McKemey et al., 2019 ; McKemey et al., 2021 ). Evidence of the low intensity and impacts of Indigenous-led cultural burns in urban areas is useful for guiding decisions about including Indigenous peoples and knowledge in urban ecosystem management and helps to reduce barriers related to fear and lack of data that influence fire management policies (Williamson, 2022 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ). Notably, this guwiyang was planned and implemented by Dharug dhiyina , addressing a critical gap in practice and research regarding the impacts of cultural burning informed by Indigenous women’s values and gendered knowledge systems, which have historically been underrepresented (Sithole et al., 2008 ; James et al., 2021 ; Cavanagh, 2022 ; Rey et al., 2025 ). Fuel and fire behaviour of the cultural guwiyang Post-burn reductions in surface fine fuels and near-surface/elevated fuels (Hines et al., 2010 ) suggest that this cultural guwiyang lowered fuel hazards at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , aligning with one of the Dharug dhiyina objectives. Burning intensity measures confirmed the patchy, low-intensity approach that was preferred by the Dharug women, aligning with other cultural burns studied in eastern Australia (McKemey et al., 2019 ). Furthermore, the Dharug dhiyina guwiyang fell within or below the recommended prescribed burning thresholds for rate of spread and flame height for sclerophyll forests (McCarthy, 2004 ; AFAC, 2015 ; Cruz et al., 2015 ). These findings are noteworthy given the colonial legacy of distrust and suppression of Indigenous fire practices (Cahir et al., 2018 ; Hoffman et al., 2021 ). While public attitudes are shifting, fear and concerns surrounding strategic fire use (such as escape risks, smoke and ecological consequences) often limit public support for burning in populated urban-bushland areas (Cortner et al., 1990 ; Bell & Oliveras, 2006 ; Altangerel & Kull, 2013 ). The results of the present study add to the growing evidence that cultural burning, like other low-intensity, patchy burns, can reduce fuel loads (McCarthy, 2004 ), potentially contributing to a reduction in wildfire risks (Boer et al., 2009 ; Penman et al., 2011 ) and protection of habitats for fire-sensitive species (Pastro et al., 2011 ). Paradoxically, there is also evidence for community concern that burning can be too frequent or intense in some cases, potentially affecting regeneration and fauna habitats (Altangerel & Kull, 2013 ). In this complex fire management context of the urban-bushland interface, cultural burning may offer a complementary approach to mainstream fire management, with not only ecological benefits and reduced wildfire risk, but also socio-cultural benefits that align with international and national goals for enhancing Indigenous inclusion in conservation and science (Price et al., 2012 ; McKemey et al., 2019 ; Country et al., 2024 ; McCormack et al., 2024 ). ‘Other-than-human’ responses to the Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang Plants This study provided data that affirmed the Dharug dhiyina objectives for the guwiyang including promotion of culturally valued plant species, particularly the medicine and food plant, Dybung/Mambara , which responded by producing regenerative shoots. This species of Geebung is known to tolerate both low- and high-intensity fires by resprouting from basal trunks, lignotubers, or root systems. Notably, low-intensity burns typically yield a higher number of shoots, which may enhance the long-term persistence of the species (Morrison & Renwick, 2000 ) and produce fresh shoots of medicinal value. However, it is important to consider that other factors, including reduced competition, increased light and nutrient availability, and altered climatic conditions, may have also contributed to the reshooting response (Benwell, 2024 ). The cultural guwiyang also aligned with the Dharug dhiyina objective to reduce the abundance of Daynya (hop bush) stems and Gurgi (bracken) frond cover (in the short term), as evident by the minimal regrowth three months after the fire. While moderate-intensity fire has been shown to stimulate germination of Daynya , the lack of post-fire recruitment detected in the three months after the event, suggested that the low intensity of the cultural guwiyang may not have reached the heat threshold required to break seed dormancy (Floyd, 1966 ). Ongoing monitoring will be essential to assess whether Daynya re-establishes and to determine the potential of cultural burning as a longer-term management tool, particularly given that it has been observed to recolonise densely, albeit typically following higher-intensity prescribed fires (Country et al., 2024 ). Gurgi also declined in the short-term following the guwiyang . Although low-intensity fire is known to temporarily reduce the dominance of this species, recovery is strongly influenced by factors such as sunlight, canopy cover, and rainfall (Spencer & Baxter, 2006 ; Fernanda & Pavel, 2022 ). In many cases, gurgi has been noted to return to pre-burn levels within six months, particularly in frequently burnt areas, given its ability to regenerate rapidly after fire through sprouting from dormant rhizomes (Tolhurst & Turvey, 1992 ; Spencer & Baxter, 2006 ). As such, the long-term effectiveness of cultural guwiyang in managing gurgi remains uncertain, and continued monitoring will be essential to determine whether repeated cultural burns can reduce dominance of this species over time. Soils The Dharug women also expressed interest in understanding changes in soil properties following the guwiyang , given the importance of soil in post-fire ecological recovery (Calderisi et al., 2025 ). No significant change in soil carbon was detected, consistent with other low-intensity fire studies (e.g., Granged et al., 2011 ; Plaza-Álvarez et al., 2017 ). In contrast, substantial increases in carbon have been observed following other Indigenous-led or moderate-intensity prescribed burns (Granged et al., 2011 ; Country et al., 2024 ). This has been attributed to black carbon produced from partially combusted material at lower temperatures (Xifré-Salvadó et al., 2021 ), which is often visible as black ash—an indicator of cool-burning, also noted by the Dharug dhiyina in conversation. In addition, no significant changes in soil moisture, pH, or electrical conductivity were measured after to the burn. While responses in soil moisture and pH vary across low-intensity fire studies (Granged et al., 2011 ; Country et al., 2024 ), the stability of electrical conductivity observed here aligned with findings by Granged et al. ( 2011 ). Overall, these outcomes likely reflect the low intensity and patchy coverage, along with post-fire rainfall and limited ash production from incomplete combustion, which together contributed to the minimal impact of the cultural guwiyang on soil properties (Granged et al., 2011 ; Xifré-Salvadó et al., 2021 ; Country et al., 2024 ). Fauna The cultural guwiyang also appeared to have limited effects on Bagarayi (swamp wallaby) and Burraga (long-nosed bandicoot) activity, reflecting the small scale and low impact of the burn. Previous research has shown that swamp wallabies can respond positively to recent burns, which stimulate the regrowth of preferred food sources such as fungi and grass shoots (Stefano et al., 2009 ; Chard et al., 2021 ). In this study, camera trap photos captured Bagarayi feeding on newly emerged fungi and grasses within a month post-burn, coinciding with a slight, though non-significant, increase in activity, mirroring short-term trends observed by Chard et al. ( 2021 ). Despite known preferences for areas with dense understorey (Fischer et al., 2019 ), our results suggest that changes to low- and mid-storey vegetation following the burn did not deter Bagarayi at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru . This may be due to the patchy nature and small scale of the burn, which maintained surrounding refugial habitat and likely mitigated the increased predation risk from exposed understorey (Chard et al., 2021 ). In contrast, Burraga activity decreased across all sites, with the most pronounced drop observed at the burn site. While this reduction might indicate some sensitivity to fire, similar declines at the control sites suggest broader ecological or seasonal influences. Burraga are considered well-adapted to small, low-intensity burns in peri-urban areas, particularly when unburnt patches and fire refugia are available (Hope, 2012 ). In their study of locally vulnerable Burraga populations at North Head, Sydney, Scott et al. ( 1999 ) emphasised that maintaining a mosaic of open foraging areas alongside dense refuges, likely historically sustained by fire regimes, is a crucial management strategy for this species. They propose that this approach is particularly important in fragmented urban landscapes, where Burraga populations face increased risks from introduced predators and motor vehicles. Nonetheless, structural habitat changes following the burn may have contributed to the decline in activity at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru , as Burraga are known to prefer dense, unburnt vegetation and typically recolonise burnt areas gradually as cover regenerates (Arthur et al., 2012 ; MacGregor et al., 2013 ; Mikac et al., 2023 ). However, short-term seasonal fluctuations and conditions were likely the over-riding factor that influenced Burraga activity patterns in this study, given that these decreases were not unique to the impact site. Burraga foraging is known to increase with warmer temperatures and moist soils that support invertebrates and hypogeous fungi, which are key food resources that decline under dry conditions (Claridge & Barry, 2000 ; Hughes & Banks, 2011 ). Reproductive activity in nearby urban-bushland populations was shown to peak in late spring and summer, declining during the colder months, likely due to energetic constraints and reduced food availability (Scott et al., 1999 ). This seasonal variation can, in turn, influence detection probabilities throughout the breeding season (MacGregor et al., 2020 ). Taken together, cooler post-burn temperatures and fluctuating rainfall may have influenced both foraging and detectability of Burraga across all sites. Long-term monitoring under similar seasonal conditions would be beneficial for disentangling fire-related effects from broader ecological trends. The mammal responses studied here are particularly relevant within urban-bushland interfaces, where remnant vegetation is fragmented, frequently disturbed, and bounded by residential development. In such landscapes, fauna must navigate a range of non-fire stressors, including habitat degradation, edge effects, and human activity that may compound or obscure responses to fire. The limited impacts observed here suggest that patchy, low-intensity cultural guwiyang may be ecologically suitable in urban-bushland settings, supporting species by maintaining habitat mosaics (Scott et al., 1999 ). Such practices may offer a culturally grounded alternative to conventional prescribed burns that are often larger and hotter, contributing to a more nuanced approach to fire management in fragmented urban landscapes. Implications for management This study examined the impacts of a relatively small cultural burn in an urban National Park, providing rare insights into the responses of the ecocultural ‘other-than-human’ entities. Due to bureaucratic processes, fears surrounding fire, and a lack of broader public understanding and trust of Indigenous fire in urban landscapes, the primary outcome of this research was to demonstrate that low-intensity cultural burns can be conducted with minimal impact. Using standard Western ecological measures, we showed that the Dharug dhiyina -led guwiyang was low-intensity and patchy, effectively reducing surface and near-surface/elevated fuel loads, while having minimal biophysical impacts on plants, soils, and fauna. Additionally, we quantified the positive effects of the cultural guwiyang in decreasing the prevalence of dominant plant species whilst promoting a culturally valued, medicinal and food species. The results contribute to growing evidence that Indigenous-led fire events, when applied appropriately, can support healthy ecosystems, cultural revitalisation and mitigate wildfire risk (Cortner et al., 1990 ; Hoffman et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, these outcomes underscore the importance of cross-cultural, two-way monitoring approaches which, in this context, combined Dharug knowledge with Western scientific methods, fostering opportunities for respectful collaboration, shared learning, and joint decision-making in fire management (Ens et al., 2015 ; McKemey et al., 2022 ). Other cultural outcomes of this Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang , as noted in a complementary publication (Rey et al. 2025 ), included increased confidence of the Dharug dhiyina to conduct burning in the urban-bushland interface. The burn also helped alleviate fears among neighbours and stakeholders, and community cohesion around the common goal of caring for Ngurra (Country) while reducing wildfire risk to local infrastructure. While the results of this burn and associated monitoring are promising, we recognise that they provide only a limited snapshot of the cultural and biophysical responses of the cultural burn. To gain a deeper understanding of changes and recovery, particularly concerning fauna, longer-term post-fire monitoring across a greater number of larger impact and control sites would be highly beneficial. Cross-cultural monitoring of the Dharug-led guwiyang captured context-specific responses from a small-scale burn in a fragmented, human-influenced landscape, so broader extrapolation should be approached with caution. Results from this study also suggest the likely benefit of follow-up burning to enhance Dharug desired outcomes and values for Ngurra . Follow-up burning may further suppress dominant or invasive flora and trigger regeneration from existing seed banks of fire-dependent species (McKemey et al., 2021 ). Additionally, burning at varied times of year at different sites could enhance the mosaic of vegetation types and growth stages, as well as refugia and resource availability for fauna (Bird et al., 2018 ; McKemey et al., 2019 ). Furthermore, ongoing fire management through Indigenous-led burning within vulnerable urban-bushland interfaces may benefit local communities and ecosystems by reducing fuel loads and decreasing bushfire risks (McKemey et al., 2019 ; Hoffman et al., 2022 ). By centring Dharug preferred cultural values and biophysical responses in the monitoring design, this study offers an example for how decolonised fire application and cross-cultural science can operate within highly regulated urban-bushland interfaces. These approaches are becoming increasingly relevant in global efforts to enhance Indigenous stewardship in climate-resilient land care. 5. Conclusions This study provided rare empirical evidence of the ecological and cultural outcomes of an Indigenous women’s-led cultural burn within an urban-bushland interface. Globally, where Indigenous fire practices have been disrupted by colonisation, institutional barriers, and risk-averse policies, these findings demonstrate the potential for Indigenous-led burning to contribute meaningfully to biodiversity conservation, wildfire risk reduction, and the restoration of cultural relationships with Country, even in densely populated landscapes. By showcasing complementary, low-impact approaches to conventional fire management, this work strengthens the case for enabling Indigenous fire stewardship in urban areas as part of broader efforts to support Indigenous inclusion in environmental governance. In the face of escalating climate-driven fire risks, small-scale, low-intensity cultural burning presents an adaptive, place-based strategy to mitigate fire risk while enhancing ecocultural resilience in urban ecosystems. By centring Indigenous leadership and two-way knowledge exchange, this work offers an approach for reimagining fire management through culturally grounded and ecologically informed collaboration. Declarations Funding This research was supported by the Macquarie University Higher Degree Research Fund (#4411/7124) and the Macquarie University Fellowship for Indigenous Researchers (MUFIR) scheme (#9061). The cultural burning component at Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru (Brown’s Waterhole) was additionally funded by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), with Macquarie University providing the auspice for the funds. Competing Interests The authors declare no competing interests. Author Contribution All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by GB. The first draft of the manuscript was written by GB and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgement We respectfully acknowledge the Dharug Traditional Owners and extend our deep gratitude to the Dharug women who led and supported this project. We honour Dharug Elders past and present and recognise Dharug enduring custodianship of Country. We also thank Macquarie University student volunteers (Mathilde Schwietzer, Rafaela Duschek) and external volunteers (James Diacono) for their valuable assistance in the field, as well as the stakeholders who supported the project’s development and implementation, particularly NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service at Lane Cove National Park for facilitating access and monitoring. Special thanks to Alexandra Carthey for her expertise and support in analysing the fauna data Data Availability The datasets generated during this study are not publicly available due to cultural and ethical considerations. The project involved co-designed monitoring with Dharug Traditional Owners, whose knowledge and values informed the research. Any requests for access to data should be made in consultation with the Dharug Women’s and Allies Cultural Fire Alliance and the corresponding author, and will be considered in line with principles of Indigenous data sovereignty and ethical research practice. References AFAC (2015) National guidelines for prescribed burning operations: Case Study 2 – Burning young silvertop ash regrowth forests in NSW. Report for National Burning Project – Subproject 4 Altangerel K, Kull CA (2013) The prescribed burning debate in Australia: conflicts and compatibilities. J Environ Planning Manage 56(1):103–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.652831 Ansell J, Evans J (2019) Contemporary Aboriginal savanna burning projects in Arnhem Land: a regional description and analysis of the fire management aspirations of Traditional Owners. Int J Wildland Fire 29(5):371–385. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF18152 Arthur AD, Catling PC, Reid A (2012) Relative influence of habitat structure, species interactions and rainfall on the post-fire population dynamics of ground‐dwelling vertebrates. Austral Ecol 37(8):958–970. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2011.02355.x Atkinson A, Montiel-Molina C (2023) Reconnecting fire culture of Aboriginal communities with contemporary wildfire risk management. Fire 6(8):296. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire6080296 Attenbrow V (2010) Sydney's Aboriginal past: investigating the archaeological and historical records. Unsw Bartlett C, Marshall M, Marshall A (2012) Two-eyed seeing and other lessons learned within a co-learning journey of bringing together indigenous and mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing. J Environ Stud Sci 2:331–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-012-0086-8 Bell T, Oliveras I (2006) Perceptions of prescribed burning in a local forest community in Victoria, Australia. Environ Manage 38(5):867–878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0290-3 Bento-Gonçalves A, Vieira A (2020) Wildfires in the wildland-urban interface: Key concepts and evaluation methodologies. Sci Total Environ 707:135592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135592 Benwell A (2024) Fire responses of flora in a sclerophyll–rainforest vegetation complex in the Nightcap Range, North Coast, New South Wales. Aust J Bot 72(1). https://doi.org/10.1071/BT23049 Bessarab D, Ng'Andu B (2010) Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous research. Int J Crit Indigenous Stud 3(1):37–50. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.v3i1.57 Bird DW, Bird B, R., Parker CH (2004) Women Who Hunt with Fire: Aboriginal Resource Use and Fire Regimes in Australia's Western Desert. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2004(1), 90–96 Bird RB, Bird DW, Fernandez LE, Taylor N, Taylor W, Nimmo D (2018) Aboriginal burning promotes fine-scale pyrodiversity and native predators in Australia's Western Desert. Biol Conserv 219:110–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.01.008 Black MP, Mooney SD (2007) The response of Aboriginal burning practices to population levels and El Niño–Southern Oscillation events during the mid-to late-Holocene: a case study from the Sydney Basin using charcoal and pollen analysis. Aust Geogr 38(1):37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049180601175857 Boer MM, Sadler RJ, Wittkuhn RS, McCaw L, Grierson PF (2009) Long-term impacts of prescribed burning on regional extent and incidence of wildfires—Evidence from 50 years of active fire management in SW Australian forests. For Ecol Manag 259(1):132–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.005 Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White J-SS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24(3):127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008 Bourke M, Atkinson A, Neale T (2020) Putting Country back together: a conversation about collaboration and Aboriginal fire management. Postcolonial Stud 23(4):546–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2020.1751909 Bowd EJ, Cary GJ, Freeman D, Bell-Garner B, Lindenmayer D (2025) Plant Responses to a Re‐emergence of Cultural Burning in Long‐Unburnt, Threatened Temperate Woodlands. Glob Change Biol 31(6):e70230. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70230 Bowman D, Panton W (1995) Munmarlary revisited: response of a north Australian Eucalyptus tetrodonta savanna protected from fire for 20 years. Aust J Ecol 20(4):526–531. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1995.tb00571.x Bradstock RA, Gill A, Kenny B, Scott J (1998) Bushfire risk at the urban interface estimated from historical weather records: consequences for the use of prescribed fire in the Sydney region of south-eastern Australia. J Environ Manage 52(3):259–271. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1997.0177 Brook J, Kohen JL (1991) The Parramatta native institution and the black town: A history. No Title) Bureau of Meteorology (2025) Climate Data Online . Retrieved 6 May 2025 from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/?ref=ftr Cahir F, Clark I, Clarke P (2018) Aboriginal biocultural knowledge in south-eastern Australia: Perspectives of early colonists. Csiro Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1071/9781486306121 Calderisi G, Salaris E, Cogoni D, Rossetti I, Murtas F, Fenu G (2025) Relationship Between Post-Fire Vegetation Recovery and Soil Temperature in the Mediterranean Forest. Fire 8(3):91. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8030091 Cavanagh V (2022) The (re) emergence of Aboriginal women and cultural burning in New South Wales, Australia. Global Application of Prescribed Fire, p 86 Chard M, Foster CN, Lindenmayer DB, Cary GJ, MacGregor C, Blanchard W (2021) Time Since Fire Influences Macropod Occurrence in a Fire-prone Coastal Ecosystem. Austral Ecol 47(3):507–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13127 Christianson A (2014) Social science research on Indigenous wildfire management in the 21st century and future research needs. Int J Wildland Fire 24(2):190–200. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF13048 Claridge AW, Barry SC (2000) Factors influencing the distribution of medium-sized ground‐dwelling mammals in southeastern mainland Australia. Austral Ecol 25(6):676–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2000.tb00074.x Clark SS, McLoughlin LC (1986) Historical and biological evidence for fire regimes in the Sydney region prior to the arrival of Europeans: implications for future bushland management. Aust Geogr 17(2):101–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049188608702909 Cortner HJ, Gardner PD, Taylor JG (1990) Fire hazards at the urban-wildland interface: What the public expects. Environ Manage 14:57–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394019 Country M, Davis J, Simmons J, Snelson S, Channell V, Haynes K, Deutscher N, Brook L, Dosseto A (2024) Quantitative Assessment of the Effect of Agency-Led Prescribed Burns and Cultural Burns on Soil Properties in Southeastern Australia. Fire 7(3):75. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire7030075 Cruz M, Gould J, Alexander M, Sullivan A, McCaw W, Matthews S (2015) A guide to the rate of fire spread models for Australian vegetation. Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council Ltd. And Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation., Melbourne, Vic Danielsen F, Burgess ND, Balmford A (2005) Monitoring matters: examining the potential of locally-based approaches. Biodivers Conserv 14(11):2507–2542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-8375-0 Darques R (2015) Mediterranean cities under fire. A critical approach to the wildland–urban interface. Appl Geogr 59:10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.02.008 David B, Fletcher M-S, Connor S, Pullin VR, Birkett-Rees J, Delannoy J-J, Mariani M, Romano A, Maezumi SY (2024) Cultural Burning. Elements in Current Archaeological Tools and Techniques. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009485340 DCCEEW (2010) NPWS Fire History – Wildfires and Prescribed Burns . https://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/fire-history-wildfires-and-prescribed-burns-1e8b6 DCCEEW (2020) NSW State Vegetation Type Map . https://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/nsw-state-vegetation-type-map Department of Planning, I. a. E (2021) Australian Soil Classification (ASC) Soil Type map of NSW Version Version 4.5) Díaz SC, Quezada LC, Álvarez LJ, Loján-Córdova J, Carrión-Paladines V (2023) Indigenous use of fire in the paramo ecosystem of southern Ecuador: A case study using remote sensing methods and ancestral knowledge of the Kichwa Saraguro people. Fire Ecol 19(1):5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-022-00164-1 Dickson-Hoyle S, St̓uxwtéws, Corporation SNR, Eatherton A, Baron JN, Tiribelli F, Daniels LD (2024) Fire severity drives understory community dynamics and the recovery of culturally significant plants. Ecosphere 15(3):e4795. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4795 Eloy L, Bilbao A, Mistry B, J., Schmidt IB (2019) From fire suppression to fire management: Advances and resistances to changes in fire policy in the savannas of Brazil and Venezuela. Geographical J 185(1):10–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12245 Ens EJ, Pert P, Clarke PA, Budden M, Clubb L, Doran B, Douras C, Gaikwad J, Gott B, Leonard S, Locke J, Packer J, Turpin G, Wason S (2015) Indigenous biocultural knowledge in ecosystem science and management: Review and insight from Australia. Biol Conserv 181:133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.008 Ens EJ, Turpin G (2022) Synthesis of Australian cross-cultural ecology featuring a decade of annual Indigenous ecological knowledge symposia at the Ecological Society of Australia conferences. Ecological management & restoration, 23(3–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12539 Fernanda T, Pavel D (2022) Fire has short-term negative effects on a super-dominant native fern, Pteridium arachnoideum (Dennstaedtiaceae), in a Brazilian savanna. Nat Conserv Res Заповедная наука 7(3):15–25. https://doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2022.027 Fischer M, Stefano JD, Gras P, Kramer-Schadt S, Sutherland DR, Coulson G, Stillfried M (2019) Circadian Rhythms Enable Efficient Resource Selection in a Human‐modified Landscape. Ecol Evol 9(13):7509–7527. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5283 Fitzgibbon SI, Wilson RS, Goldizen AW (2011) The behavioural ecology and population dynamics of a cryptic ground-dwelling mammal in an urban Australian landscape. Austral Ecol 36(6):722–732. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2010.02209.x Fletcher M-S, Romano A, Connor S, Mariani M, Maezumi SY (2021) Catastrophic bushfires, indigenous fire knowledge and reframing science in Southeast Australia. Fire 4(3):61. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire4030061 Floyd A (1966) Effect of fire upon weed seeds in the wet sclerophyll forests of northern New South Wales. Aust J Bot 14(2):243–256. https://doi.org/10.1071/BT9660243 Fox J, Weisberg S (2018) An R companion to applied regression. Sage publications. https://doi.org/10.32614/CRAN.package.carData Freeman D, Williamson B, Weir J (2021) Cultural burning and public sector practice in the Australian Capital Territory. Aust Geogr 52(2):111–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2021.1917133 Gammage B (2013) The biggest estate on earth Gigliotti LC, Curveira-Santos G, Slotow R, Sholto‐Douglas C, Swanepoel LH, Jachowski DS (2022) Community‐level responses of African carnivores to prescribed burning. J Appl Ecol 59(1):251–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14050 Granged AJ, Jordán A, Zavala LM, Muñoz-Rojas M, Mataix-Solera J (2011) Short-term effects of experimental fire for a soil under eucalyptus forest (SE Australia). Geoderma 167:125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.09.011 Hines F, Hines F, Tolhurst KG, Wilson AA, McCarthy GJ (2010) Overall fuel hazard assessment guide. Victorian Government, Department of Sustainability and Environment East … Hoffman KM, Christianson AC, Dickson-Hoyle S, Copes-Gerbitz K, Nikolakis W, Diabo DA, McLeod R, Michell HJ, Mamun AA, Zahara A (2022) The right to burn: barriers and opportunities for Indigenous-led fire stewardship in Canada. Facets 7(1):464–481. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0062 Hoffman KM, Davis EL, Wickham SB, Schang K, Johnson A, Larking T, Lauriault PN, Le Q, Swerdfager N, E., Trant AJ (2021) Conservation of Earth’s biodiversity is embedded in Indigenous fire stewardship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(32), e2105073118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2105073118 Hoogsteen MJ, Lantinga EA, Bakker EJ, Groot JC, Tittonell PA (2015) Estimating soil organic carbon through loss on ignition: effects of ignition conditions and structural water loss. Eur J Soil Sci 66(2):320–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.12224 Hope B (2012) Short-term response of the long-nosed bandicoot, Perameles nasuta, and the southern brown bandicoot, Isoodon obesulus obesulus, to low-intensity prescribed fire in heathland vegetation. Wildl Res (East Melbourne) 39(8):731–744. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR12110 Hughes NK, Banks PB (2011) Heading for greener pastures? Defining the foraging preferences of urban long-nosed bandicoots. Australian J Zool 58(6):341–349. https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO10051 James R, Gibbs B, Whitford L, Leisher C, Konia R, Butt N (2021) Conservation and natural resource management: where are all the women? Oryx 55(6):860–867. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605320001349 Jurskis V, Underwood R (2013) Human fires and wildfires on Sydney sandstones: history informs management. Fire Ecol 9:8–24. https://doi.org/10.4996/fireecology.0903008 Karskens G (2009) The colony: A history of early Sydney. Allen & Unwin Kirkpatrick JB, Driessen MM, Jarman PJ, Jakob L (2023) Influences of adjacent suburbia, fire regimes and vegetation on the mammals of a peri-urban reserve. Urban Ecosyst 26(4):905–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01355-7 Kohen JL (1986) Prehistoric settlement in the Western Cumberland Plain: resources, environment and technology Macquarie University] Lake FK, Christianson AC (2020) Indigenous fire stewardship. In Encyclopedia of wildfires and wildland-urban interface (WUI) fires (pp. 714–722). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52090-2_225 Legge S, Bijlani H, Taylor B, Shovellor J, McCarthy F, Murray C, Ala’i J, Brown C, Tromp K, Bayley S (2024) Pirra Jungku and Pirra Warlu: using traditional fire-practice knowledge and contemporary science to guide fire-management goals for desert animals. Wildl Res 51(10). https://doi.org/10.1071/WR24069 Liebenberg L (2012) The CyberTracker Story. Unpublished report MacGregor CI, Blanchard W, Stein JA, Lindenmayer DB (2020) Factors influencing the occurrence of the Southern Long-nosed Bandicoot (Perameles nasuta Geoffroy) during a population irruption and decline. Austral Ecol 45(6):834–844. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12930 MacGregor CI, Wood JT, Dexter N, Lindenmayer DB (2013) Home range size and use by the long-nosed bandicoot (Perameles nasuta) following fire. Australian Mammalogy 35(2):206–216. https://doi.org/10.1071/AM12032 Maclagan SJ, Coates T, Ritchie EG (2018) Don't judge habitat on its novelty: Assessing the value of novel habitats for an endangered mammal in a peri-urban landscape. Biol Conserv 223:11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.04.022 McCarthy GJ (2004) Surface fine fuel hazard rating: Forest fuels in east gippsland. Department of Sustainability and Environment McCormack P, McKemey M, Costello O (2024) Identifying and overcoming legal barriers to cultural burning McKemey M, Patterson M, Rangers B, Ens EJ, Reid NC, Hunter JT, Costello O, Ridges M, Miller C (2019) Cross-cultural monitoring of a cultural keystone species informs revival of indigenous burning of country in South-Eastern Australia. Human Ecology, 47(893–904. https://doi.org/0.1007/s10745-019-00120-9 McKemey M, Patterson ML, Hunter J, Ridges M, Ens E, Miller C, Costello O, Reid N (2021) Indigenous cultural burning had less impact than wildfire on the threatened Backwater grevillea (Grevillea scortechinii subsp. sarmentosa) while effectively decreasing fuel loads. Int J Wildland Fire 30(10):745–756. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20135 McKemey MB, Rangers B, Rangers YM, Costello O, Hunter JT, Ens EJ (2022) Right-way’science: reflections on co‐developing Indigenous and Western cross‐cultural knowledge to support Indigenous cultural fire management. Ecol Manage Restor 23:75–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12532 McLoughlin LC (1998) Season of burning in the Sydney region: the historical records compared with recent prescribed burning. Aust J Ecol 23(4):393–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1998.tb00744.x McStephen M (2014) Fire and Biodiversity Monitoring Manual Meek PD, Fleming P, Ballard G (2012) An introduction to camera trapping for wildlife surveys in Australia. Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre Canberra, Australia Mikac KM, Knipler ML, Gracanin A, Newbery MS (2023) Ground dwelling mammal response to fire: a case study from Monga National Park after the 2019/2020 Clyde Mountain fire. Austral Ecol 48(1):19–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13109 Miritis V, Dickman CR, Nimmo DG, Doherty TS (2024) After the ‘Black Summer’fires: Faunal responses to megafire depend on fire severity, proportional area burnt and vegetation type. J Appl Ecol 61(1):63–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14545 Morrison DA, Renwick JA (2000) Effects of variation in fire intensity on regeneration of co-occurring species of small trees in the Sydney region. Aust J Bot 48(1):71–79. https://doi.org/10.1071/BT98054 Neale T, Carter R, Nelson T, Bourke M (2019) Walking together: a decolonising experiment in bushfire management on Dja Dja Wurrung country. Cult geographies 26(3):341–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474018821419 Ngurra D, Dadd L, Glass P, Scott R, Graham M, Judge S, Hodge P, Suchet-Pearson S (2019) Yanama budyari gumada: reframing the urban to care as Darug Country in western Sydney. Aust Geogr 50(3):279–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2019.1601150 Ngurra D, Dadd L, Norman C, Scott R, Tynan L, Graham M, Suchet-Pearson S, Narwal H, Lemire J (2025) Biyani Guwiyang Dharug Ngurrawa: healing fire on Dharug country. Ecosyst People 21(1):2495016. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2025.2495016 Nikolakis W, Ross RM (2022) Rebuilding Yunesit’in fire (Qwen) stewardship: Learnings from the land. Forestry Chron 98(1):36–43. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc2022-001 O’Kelly BC (2004) Accurate determination of moisture content of organic soils using the oven drying method. Drying Technol 22(7):1767–1776. https://doi.org/10.1081/DRT-200025642 Office of Environment and Heritage (2016) Lane Cove National Park Plan of Management Ooi MK, Whelan RJ, Auld TD (2006) Persistence of obligate-seeding species at the population scale: effects of fire intensity, fire patchiness and long fire-free intervals. Int J Wildland Fire 15(2):261–269. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF05024 Pardini EA, Parsons LS, Ştefan V, Knight TM (2018) GLMM BACI environmental impact analysis shows coastal dune restoration reduces seed predation on an endangered plant. Restor Ecol 26(6):1190–1194. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12678 Parkins K, Scott A, Di Stefano J, Swan M, Sitters H, York A (2019) Habitat use at fire edges: does animal activity follow temporal patterns of habitat change? For Ecol Manag 451:117343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.05.013 Pascoe J, Shanks M, Pascoe B, Clarke J, Goolmeer T, Moggridge B, Williamson B, Miller M, Costello O, Fletcher MS (2023) Lighting a pathway: Our obligation to culture and Country. Ecol Manage Restor 24(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12592 Pastro LA, Dickman CR, Letnic M (2011) Burning for biodiversity or burning biodiversity? Prescribed burn vs. wildfire impacts on plants, lizards, and mammals. Ecol Appl 21(8):3238–3253. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-2351.1 Paull DJ, Claridge AW, Barry SC (2011) There’s no accounting for taste: bait attractants and infrared digital cameras for detecting small to medium ground-dwelling mammals. Wildl Res 38(3):188–195. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR10203 Penman TD, Christie FJ, Andersen AN, Bradstock RA, Cary GJ, Henderson MK, Price O, Tran C, Wardle GM, Williams RJ (2011) Prescribed burning: how can it work to conserve the things we value? Int J Wildland Fire 20(6):721–733. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF09131 Plaza-Álvarez PA, Lucas-Borja ME, Sagra J, Moya D, Fontúrbel T, De las Heras J (2017) Soil respiration changes after prescribed fires in Spanish black pine (Pinus nigra Arn. ssp. salzmannii) monospecific and mixed forest stands. Forests 8(7):248. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8070248 Price OF, Russell-Smith J, Watt F (2012) The influence of prescribed fire on the extent of wildfire in savanna landscapes of western Arnhem Land, Australia. Int J Wildland Fire 21(3):297–305. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF10079 R Core Team (2024) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org Rawluk A, Neale T, Smith W, Doherty T, Ritchie E, Pascoe J, Murray M, Carter R, Bourke M, Falconer S (2023) Tomorrow’s Country: Practice-oriented principles for Indigenous cultural fire research in south‐east Australia. Geographical Res 61(3):333–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12596 Reidy M, Chevalier W, McDonald T (2005) Lane Cove National Park Bushcare volunteers: taking stock, 10 years on. Ecol Manage Restor 6(2):94–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2005.00225.x Rey JA (2021) Indigenous identity as country: The Ing within connecting, caring, and belonging. Genealogy 5(2):48. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy5020048 Rey JA (2022) Quiet activism through Dharug Ngurra: Reporting locally grown–not from the European South1. Eur South 10:25–40 Rey JA, Norman CW, Brennan G, Ens E, Norman-Hill R (2025) Burning Love’, Living Ngurra: Healing Country, Healing Hearts and Sharing Minds in Dharug Country. J Global Indigeneity 9(1). https://doi.org/10.54760/001c.138509 Robinson NM, Scheele BC, Legge S, Southwell D, Carter O, Lintermans M, Radford JQ, Skroblin A, Dickman CR, Koleck J, Wayne AF, Kanowski J, Gillespie GR, Lindenmayer DB (2018) How to Ensure Threatened Species Monitoring Leads to Threatened Species Conservation. Ecol Manage Restor 19(3):222–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12335 Russell-Smith J, Cook GD, Cooke PM, Edwards AC, Lendrum M, Meyer C, Whitehead PJ (2013) Managing fire regimes in north Australian savannas: applying Aboriginal approaches to contemporary global problems. Front Ecol Environ 11(s1):e55–e63. https://doi.org/10.1890/120251 Russell-Smith J, Lucas D, Gapindi M, Gunbunuka B, Kapirigi N, Namingum G, Lucas K, Giuliani P, Chaloupka G (1997) Aboriginal resource utilization and fire management practice in western Arnhem Land, monsoonal northern Australia: notes for prehistory, lessons for the future. Hum Ecol 25(2):159–195. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021970021670 Russell-Smith J, Whitehead P, Cooke P (2009) Culture, ecology and economy of fire management in North Australian savannas: rekindling the Wurrk tradition. Csiro Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1071/9780643098299 Scott LK, Hume ID, Dickman CR (1999) Ecology and population biology of long-nosed bandicoots () at North Head, Sydney Harbour National Park. Wildl Res (East Melbourne) 26(6):805–821. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR98074 Sithole B, Hunter-Xenie H, Williams wL, Saegenschnitter J, Yibarbuk D, Ryan M, Campion O, Yunupingu B, Liddy M, Watts E (2008) Aboriginal land and sea management in the Top End: a community-driven evaluation. Darwin, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems Skroblin A, Carboon T, Bidu G, Taylor M, Bidu N, Taylor W, Taylor K, Miller M, Robinson L, Williams C (2022) Developing a two-way learning monitoring program for Mankarr (Greater Bilby) in the Western Desert, Western Australia. Ecol Manage Restor 23:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12543 Smith W, Neale T, Weir JK (2021) Persuasion without policies: The work of reviving Indigenous peoples’ fire management in southern Australia. Geoforum 120:82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.01.015 Spencer R-J, Baxter GS (2006) Effects of fire on the structure and composition of open eucalypt forests. Austral Ecol 31(5):638–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2006.01616.x Stefano JD, York A, Swan M, Greenfield A, Coulson G (2009) Habitat Selection by the Swamp Wallaby ( Wallabia Bicolor) in Relation to Diel Period, Food and Shelter. Austral Ecol 34(2):143–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01890.x Steffensen V (2020) Fire country: How Indigenous fire management could help save Australia. CSIRO Publishing Tolhurst KG, Turvey ND (1992) Effects of bracken (Pteridium esculentum (Forst. f.) Cockayne) on eucalypt regeneration in west-central Victoria. For Ecol Manag 54(1–4):45–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(92)90004-S Tynan L, Cavanagh V (2021) Fire. AZ of Shadow Places Concepts, 1–4 Underwood A (1994) On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecol Appl 4(1):3–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942110 Vigilante T, Bowman D (2004) Effects of individual fire events on the flower production of fruit-bearing tree species, with reference to Aboriginal people's management and use, at Kalumburu, North Kimberley, Australia. Aust J Bot 52(3):405–416. https://doi.org/10.1071/BT03157 Watchorn DJ, Doherty TS, Wilson BA, Garkaklis MJ, Driscoll DA (2024) How do invasive predators and their native prey respond to prescribed fire? Ecol Evol 14(5):e11450. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11450 Weir JK (2023) Expert knowledge, collaborative concepts, and universal nature: naming the place of Indigenous knowledge within a public-sector cultural burning program. Ecol Soc 28(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13822-280117 Williamson B (2022) Cultural burning and public forests: convergences and divergences between Aboriginal groups and forest management in south-eastern Australia. 85(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2022.2054134 Williamson B, Weir J (2021) Indigenous peoples and natural hazard research, policy and practice in southern temperate Australia: an agenda for change. TheAustralian J Emerg Manage 36(4):62–67. https://doi.org/10.47389/36.4.62 Xifré-Salvadó MÀ, Prat-Guitart N, Francos M, Ubeda X, Castellnou M (2021) Effects of fire on the organic and chemical properties of soil in a Pinus halepensis Mill. Forest in Rocallaura. NE Spain Sustain 13(9):5178. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095178 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 18 Nov, 2025 Read the published version in Urban Ecosystems → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 24 Aug, 2025 Reviews received at journal 24 Aug, 2025 Reviews received at journal 15 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 14 Aug, 2025 Reviews received at journal 12 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Aug, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 09 Aug, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 07 Aug, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 07 Aug, 2025 First submitted to journal 07 Aug, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7322178","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":502587363,"identity":"368c36a5-1911-43f7-8aef-276cc03e1b7f","order_by":0,"name":"Gabrielle Brennan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Macquarie University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gabrielle","middleName":"","lastName":"Brennan","suffix":""},{"id":502587369,"identity":"c6a884f4-0df3-41e6-947a-f5eb8349f7fb","order_by":1,"name":"Jo Anne Rey","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Macquarie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jo","middleName":"Anne","lastName":"Rey","suffix":""},{"id":502587370,"identity":"82677578-e57d-434a-b576-1f9e158d437b","order_by":2,"name":"Hsing-Chung Chang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Macquarie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hsing-Chung","middleName":"","lastName":"Chang","suffix":""},{"id":502587371,"identity":"8c04bcc4-b1a9-49f5-9eb1-bf7c60810012","order_by":3,"name":"Emilie Ens","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Macquarie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Emilie","middleName":"","lastName":"Ens","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-07 23:23:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01839-8","type":"published","date":"2025-11-18T15:58:44+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":89599697,"identity":"50c4714e-e424-42ed-b496-6180f145a04e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 17:47:41","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1288706,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eVegetation map of the impact site (\u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e/Brown’s Waterhole) and control sites (Devlin’s Creek, Middle Site, Terry’s Creek) surrounding Lane Cove National Park (dashed line), north-west Sydney, Australia. Map created using ArcGIS Pro (Esri, Redlands, CA, USA).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/6e51da2db4a137e3d249b832.jpeg"},{"id":89599698,"identity":"696541d4-630b-447c-a784-9c002a86e14b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 17:47:41","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":343796,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTimeline of biocultural monitoring activities and Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e-led cultural workshops associated with the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e(fire).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/f0504d59eef0ddd5f251c3af.jpeg"},{"id":89599699,"identity":"2b782a71-564e-422d-b5d5-87296e4763a4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 17:47:41","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":372313,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMonthly mean maximum and minimum temperature (°C) and total rainfall (mm) during the monitoring period. Climate data sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology (2025), figure created using R Studio (Version 12.1; R Core Team, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/1438ab8eb19a11306bc6df80.jpeg"},{"id":89600264,"identity":"de317e22-4098-4c92-a0ba-deaff7e66b30","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 17:55:41","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":77820,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMonitoring layout at the impact (burn) site at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e. The design includes six camera traps (X) and three randomly allocated 1 m² vegetation quadrats per grid cell, mirrored at control sites. Map created using ArcGIS Pro (Esri, Redlands, CA, USA).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/d1d92626791532f7435c9abc.png"},{"id":89600375,"identity":"cd6cf50b-c5d7-4be3-aa06-9a12c98231ac","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 18:03:41","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":177129,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eResponses of soil variables at impact and control sites before and after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, including soil moisture (%), soil carbon (%), electrical conductivity (mS/cm), and pH. Site abbreviations: \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (BBN), Devlin’s Creek (DC), Middle Site (MS), and Terry’s Creek (TC). Created using R Studio (Version 12.1; R Core Team, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/1b75eb96b671bd81474b9d13.png"},{"id":89599701,"identity":"8319ed37-b8ac-48fd-95ff-64fcaf1110c8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-21 17:47:41","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":69451,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEstimated activity (proportion of days detected) for \u003cem\u003eBurraga \u003c/em\u003e(Long-nosed bandicoot) and \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e (Swamp wallaby) activity, across pooled before and after survey periods at impact and control sites. Prediction probability estimates were obtained from the binomial GLM. Bars show mean predicted probabilities of activity, with 95% confidence intervals. Created using R Studio (Version 12.1; R Core Team, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/85385272b02b0f0df5f75cf4.png"},{"id":96650949,"identity":"888ad00c-1404-44e0-8fb8-31e46037fb83","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-24 16:13:01","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3301958,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7322178/v1/dff7c697-297e-4535-ba7c-0a5dc58a1c08.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Ecocultural monitoring reveals low impact of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s) guwiyang (fire) in an urban national park, Australia","fulltext":[{"header":"Positionality Statement","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research was undertaken by a team comprising both Indigenous (Rey) and non-Indigenous Australian researchers (Brennan, Ens, Chang), all affiliated with the university sector who listened and learnt from Dharug Ngurra (Country) as the senior author of this research. The team included expertise from the biological sciences (Brennan, Ens, Chang) and Indigenous research (Rey), informed by each authors longstanding cross-cultural collaborative research partnerships in other contexts. Through this research, we intended to elevate the eco-cultural value of Indigenous fire practices through two-way learning and to enable two-eyed seeing. While we seek to honour and support Indigenous knowledge systems and Dharug Ngurra, we acknowledge that we do not speak on behalf of the values or practices of Dharug custodians and other Dharug Ngurra outside of the study team and location.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIndigenous urban fire management\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFollowing centuries of the pervasive global to local impacts of European imperialism and colonisation, Indigenous groups worldwide are increasingly reinstating traditional or cultural conservation practices, including fire management (Russell-Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR104\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Fletcher et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; D\u0026iacute;az et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). However, significant barriers remain, as in contemporary settings, fire management is highly regulated to protect infrastructure and assets, and arguably to prevent large, destructive wildfires (Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR110\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Williamson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR120\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Within urban-bushland interfaces, where native remnant bushland is situated adjacent to densely settled communities, the perceived threat and potential danger of fire is amplified (Bradstock et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Darques, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Bento-Gon\u0026ccedil;alves \u0026amp; Vieira, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). This has contributed to substantial risk-aversion in urban fire and vegetation management decision-making. In colonised nations such as Australia, Canada, and the Unites States of America, such caution is further shaped by colonial-era fear of fire and the systematic exclusion and suppression of Indigenous peoples and their land stewardship practices (Lake \u0026amp; Christianson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Freeman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR110\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Indigenous scholars and allies emphasise the ecological and cultural (ecocultural) benefits of decolonising fire management policies in contemporary settings and revitalising nuanced Indigenous fire practices and knowledges that have shaped landscapes for millennia (Bowman \u0026amp; Panton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e; Russell-Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR104\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Neale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Pascoe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndigenous fire management across many parts of the world reflects broader responsibilities of cultural stewardship, including caring for Country, sustaining resources, and facilitating access to cultural sites (Lake \u0026amp; Christianson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Fletcher et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In sparsely populated and geographically remote areas, Indigenous groups have been able to maintain and revitalise traditional fire practices to a greater extent than in urban landscapes, where land access, legal recognition, and structural barriers have limited such opportunities (Williamson \u0026amp; Weir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR121\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Williamson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR120\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In Australia, this is evident in central and northern regions, where many Indigenous communities have been able to maintain strong access to ancestral lands and opportunities to practice customary traditions, including traditional burning (Russell-Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR105\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; Ansell \u0026amp; Evans, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Williamson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR120\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Research within these regions highlights the ecological, cultural, social, and economic benefits of maintaining traditional fire management practices in contemporary settings (see Vigilante \u0026amp; Bowman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR117\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Russell-Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR106\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Bird et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Legge et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). By contrast, south-eastern Australian Indigenous communities face greater barriers to traditional fire management practice. However, despite constraints, Indigenous fire knowledge persists within urban and regional communities and is being actively revitalised, though often on a smaller scale (Steffensen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR113\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Freeman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Pascoe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Some of this activity has been documented in the academic literature (e.g., McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Neale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Freeman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Atkinson \u0026amp; Montiel-Molina, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Weir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR119\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Bowd et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), although it is important to acknowledge that many burns conducted by Indigenous Peoples are not documented in mainstream publicly accessible platforms.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, there is an increasing movement towards reinstating women\u0026rsquo;s-led cultural burning, acknowledging that Indigenous women historically played vital roles in fire management and environmental stewardship, shaped by their gendered cultural responsibilities and ecological knowledge (Bird et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Tynan \u0026amp; Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR115\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Brennan et al., 2024; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Raising awareness of Indigenous women\u0026rsquo;s-led burning is noted as particularly important given the limited research on the roles of Indigenous women in cultural burning, especially in south-eastern Australia, which likely reflects prevailing patriarchal processes (Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, the disproportionate recognition and involvement of women in broader natural resource management due to colonial and gendered barriers (Sithole et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR108\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; James et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) is gaining increasing recognition, a gap which the present project and associated research aimed to address.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBenefits of cross-cultural monitoring\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEffective monitoring and communication of conservation outcomes, in this case from Indigenous women\u0026rsquo;s-led cultural burning, can enhance understanding and foster broader receptiveness and support (Robinson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR103\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Ansell \u0026amp; Evans, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), particularly in urban landscapes where cultural practices have been significantly disrupted or suppressed (David et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Similar to the process of burning itself, monitoring can also be decolonised to reflect and highlight Indigenous values, knowledge systems, and approaches to caring for Country (Danielsen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Skroblin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR109\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, research indicates that increased collaboration between Indigenous Peoples and Western-trained scientists can deliver enhanced cross-cultural learning and conservation outcomes (Ens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Eloy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Bourke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Fletcher et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCross-cultural, two-way, right-way or two-eyed seeing approaches that combine Indigenous and Western knowledge systems and methods offer space for more genuine and respectful collaborations and inclusion (Bartlett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Ens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Ens \u0026amp; Turpin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Although cultural burning remains rare in urban settings, Australian (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Bowd et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) and international examples (Christianson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Nikolakis \u0026amp; Ross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrate how cross-cultural partnerships and effective monitoring can promote ecological, cultural, and social outcomes and abate the fear associated with fire in nearby habitats. For example, in central regional Victoria, Australia, the Dja Dja Wurrung have collaborated with bushfire management agencies to reactivate cultural burning through cross-cultural partnerships through \u0026ldquo;decolonising experiments\u0026rdquo; in fire management (Neale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, on the New South Wales tablelands, cross-cultural monitoring by Banbai people and scientists demonstrated that low-intensity cultural burning had less impact on the foraging activity of the culturally significant short-beaked echidna (\u003cem\u003eTachyglossus aculeatus\u003c/em\u003e) and the mortality of Backwater grevillea (\u003cem\u003eGrevillea scortechinii subsp. sarmentosa\u003c/em\u003e) than nearby prescribed burns (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). On the southeast coast of Australia, cultural burning has also been shown to have positive effects on soil health, such as facilitating the input of organic matter and increasing soil moisture, which in turn impacted overall ecosystem responses (Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Internationally, Indigenous groups like the Yunesit\u0026rsquo;in in North America, have applied collaborative approaches by drawing on deep ecological knowledge and \u0026ldquo;learning by doing\u0026rdquo; to restore fire practices following colonial disruptions (Nikolakis \u0026amp; Ross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). On Secw\u0026eacute;pemc territory in North America (British Columbia), collaborative research found that low-severity burns undertaken by Secw\u0026eacute;pemc people were linked to greater richness of culturally significant plant species, highlighting the role of traditional fire practices in sustaining valued resources (Dickson-Hoyle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). All these examples demonstrate the benefits of cross-cultural approaches to monitoring Indigenous-led fire; however, we could find no examples for urban ecosystems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eExploring cultural guwiyang (fire) in urban landscapes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the growth of Indigenous cultural burning in remote and regional contexts, there remains a dearth of burning and associated research in urban landscapes, including southeastern Australia (Neale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Pascoe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Rawluk et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR98\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Novel approaches to urban biodiversity management are crucial, as these areas face disproportionately high species loss due to habitat fragmentation, invasive species, altered fire regimes, and urban encroachment (Fitzgibbon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Kirkpatrick et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the fragmented environments of Sydney, Australia, conservation of small, ground-dwelling animals such as the long-nosed bandicoot (\u003cem\u003ePerameles nasuta\u003c/em\u003e), in part, requires the maintenance of habitat mosaics that include dense refuges and open foraging areas; conditions that were likely historically sustained by fire (Scott et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). Despite urban encroachment, remnant habitat patches serve as critical refuges for native species. For instance, southern brown bandicoots (\u003cem\u003eIsoodon obesulus obesulus\u003c/em\u003e) have persisted in human-modified landscapes and may benefit from repeated low-intensity burns, although foraging may initially decline after fire (Maclagan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Kirkpatrick et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Such studies highlight a complex interplay between fire frequency, habitat condition and urban pressures, reinforcing the need to consider cultural burning as a nuanced fire management strategy in fragmented urban-bushland interfaces.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCultural guwiyang around the global city of Sydney\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the Sydney Basin, early European colonial records and palaeoecological studies indicate that prior to European colonisation, Indigenous Dharug people and neighbouring groups used fire to manage their ancestral clan estates (Clark \u0026amp; McLoughlin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e; Kohen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e; McLoughlin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Black \u0026amp; Mooney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Gammage, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Jurskis \u0026amp; Underwood, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Following European colonisation, cultural fire practices were widely suppressed across south eastern Australia (Cahir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), including within the Sydney Basin, where burning largely ceased (Attenbrow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). This was likely a result of the dispossession of local Indigenous groups from their lands and the disruption of cultural practices (Brook \u0026amp; Kohen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e; Karskens, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Despite these significant impacts on traditional custodial responsibilities, Dharug are reigniting and continuing cultural practices across \u003cem\u003eNgurra\u003c/em\u003e (Country), including restoring \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (fire) as a deliberate act of restorative healing for \u003cem\u003eNgurra\u003c/em\u003e and the community (Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study focused on the recent revitalisation of Indigenous cultural burning in Sydney, where such actions and research remain sparse, especially concerning the contributions of Indigenous women (Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Through a cross-cultural collaboration between Dharug women and university scientists at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (Brown\u0026rsquo;s Waterhole), Walumadagal \u003cem\u003eNgurra\u003c/em\u003e, this study explored the ecocultural responses of \u0026lsquo;other-than-human\u0026rsquo; (biophysical) landscape elements to a low-intensity Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e (women\u0026rsquo;s)-led cultural burn (see Appendix 1 for a glossary of Dharug terms). The Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e identified the following key objectives for the burn: (1) Create a low intensity fire to minimise ecological impacts while reducing fuel loads for wildfire mitigation; (2) Protect culturally significant plant species, such as \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e (narrow-leaved geebung, \u003cem\u003ePersoonia linearis\u003c/em\u003e), and reduce the dominance of \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e (common hop bush, \u003cem\u003eDodonaea triquetra\u003c/em\u003e) and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e (bracken ferns, \u003cem\u003ePteridium esculentum; Calochlaena dubia\u003c/em\u003e); (3) Understand the fire\u0026rsquo;s influence on soil properties; and (4) Ensure minimal impacts on fauna, with a focus on the culturally important mammal species: \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e (long-nosed bandicoot, \u003cem\u003ePerameles nasuta\u003c/em\u003e) and \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e (swamp wallaby, \u003cem\u003eWallabia bicolor\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. Co-developing cross-cultural approaches\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn 2023, the Dharug Women\u0026rsquo;s and Allies Cultural Fire Alliance (DWACFA) invited non-Indigenous researchers (Authors GB, EE, MC) to assist with cross-cultural monitoring of \u0026lsquo;other-than-human\u0026rsquo; outcomes of a cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e led by Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e. This research complements prior socio-cultural research led by Dharug researcher and author JR (Rey, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), as well as previous and ongoing Dharug-led cultural burns in western Sydney (Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ngurra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The co-development of the cross-cultural monitoring program occurred through a series of yarning sessions (see Bessarab \u0026amp; Ng'Andu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) between JR, EE, MC and GB. These discussions focused on key interests and questions raised by the DWACFA regarding the proposed cultural burn, building on exploratory biocultural monitoring previously conducted by the DWACFA, which included recording edible, medicinal, and useful plants and animals using electronic data collection software CyberTracker (Liebenberg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), alongside camera traps. Through these yarning sessions, we identified specific Dharug interests and aspirations for \u0026lsquo;other-than-human\u0026rsquo; responses to the proposed \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, such as soil, fauna and useful Dharug plants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Study sites\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Dharug-led cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e was undertaken in April 2024 at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, Lane Cove National Park (LCNP), in north-west Sydney, Australia (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). This site holds cultural significance and ancestral connection for the co-author JR (Rey, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). It is also an important urban habitat refuge for threatened plant and fauna species (Reidy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), within an urban residential and light commercial zone adjacent to Macquarie University (Office of Environment and Heritage, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The planned cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e area was relatively small, as Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e wanted to tread slowly to avoid instilling fear, and target the dominant \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e. Hence, the study area reflected this aim and covered a 30mx30m area. To assess \u0026lsquo;other-than-human\u0026rsquo; responses to the \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (impact site) \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, we compared characteristics to three adjacent control sites. Control sites were selected within 2km of the burn site in LCNP and between 300-900m apart (access dependent), with similar habitat/vegetation type, aspect, slope, and proximity to the Lane Cove River (~\u0026thinsp;20m) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). This approach followed the modified BACI (Before-After, Control-Impact) monitoring design of Underwood (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR116\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e) for a single impact site and multiple control sites (Pardini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was located within the Sydney Enriched Sandstone Moist Forest (sclerophyll) vegetation type (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e; DCCEEW, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The soil is primarily classified as rudosol, characterised by well-drained sand and gravel composition (Department of Planning, 2021). Dominant tree species included: Sydney peppermint (\u003cem\u003eEucalyptus piperita\u003c/em\u003e), red bloodwood (\u003cem\u003eCorymbia gummifera\u003c/em\u003e), Sydney red gum (\u003cem\u003eAngophora costata\u003c/em\u003e) and blackbutt (\u003cem\u003eEucalyptus pilularis\u003c/em\u003e). Mid-storey species included: \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e (broad-leaved geebung, \u003cem\u003ePersoonia levis;\u003c/em\u003e narrow-leaved geebung, \u003cem\u003ePersoonia linearis\u003c/em\u003e), linear-leaf grevillea (\u003cem\u003eGrevilliea linerifolia\u003c/em\u003e), blueberry ash (\u003cem\u003eElaeocarpus reticulatus\u003c/em\u003e) and \u003cem\u003eGulgadya\u003c/em\u003e (broadleaf grass-tree, \u003cem\u003eXanthorrhoea arborea;\u003c/em\u003e grass tree, \u003cem\u003eXanthorrhoea media\u003c/em\u003e). Dominant ground cover species were: \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eBamuru\u003c/em\u003e (spiny-headed mat-rush, \u003cem\u003eLomandra longifolia\u003c/em\u003e), pithy sword-sedge (\u003cem\u003eLepidosperma laterale\u003c/em\u003e), \u003cem\u003eWarabura\u003c/em\u003e (sweet sarsaparilla, \u003cem\u003eSmilax glyciphylla\u003c/em\u003e) and snake vine (\u003cem\u003eStephania japonica\u003c/em\u003e). At the burn site, \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e was dominant in the mid-ground story in some areas. \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e is known to occupy disturbed sites (Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (Brown\u0026rsquo;s Waterholewas partially burnt 5 years prior to the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e during an arson-related bushfire in 2019. This followed a prescribed burn conducted across the entire site in 2018. Before these events, the site had not experienced fire for 16 years (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Two control sites, Middle Site and Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek, were last burned by prescribed fires in 2018 and 2010, respectively. Additionally, all sites had been impacted by bushfire in 2001/2002. According to JR, the proposed cultural burn at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e was \u0026ldquo;an historic cultural burn\u0026hellip; It's the first time since the early colonial period that Dharug have burnt there\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFire histories and time since last fire of each monitoring site, including bushfires (BF) and prescribed burns (PB) (DCCEEW, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSite Name\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFire Histories\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTime Since Last Fire (from 2024)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTerry\u0026rsquo;s Creek\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2002 (BF)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e22 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2019 (BF), 2018 (PB), 2002 (BF)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMiddle Site\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2018 (PB), 2002 (BF), 1993/1994 (BF)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2010 (PB), 2002 (BF), 1993/1994 (BF), 1976 (BF)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3. Cultural burn process\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThroughout the cultural journey, several stakeholder days were held before the burn, engaging the Dharug community and local river \u0026lsquo;neighbours\u0026rsquo; (see Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. These events served as important communication channels and opportunities for relationship-building between the Dharug and non-Indigenous residents and stakeholders, thereby supporting the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e process. Prior to the cultural burn, DWACFA ran a four-day workshop in March 2024 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), which involved cultural preparations for the site. One week before the cultural burn, the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e trimmed the \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e stems (from ~\u0026thinsp;2m to ~\u0026thinsp;50 cm) to reduce the fuel load and likelihood of intense burning, as they wanted to impart a \u0026lsquo;cool\u0026rsquo; traditional cultural burn. The cultural burn was undertaken across four days in late April 2024, led by the DWACFA, with other Dharug, Indigenous and non-Indigenous community members, stakeholders, and New South Wales government National Parks and Wildlife Service staff. As outlined in Rey et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e led the burn, beginning at the highest point of the site (west) and moving across in groups, using multiple ignition points to create fire mosaic patches or circles. Rake hoes were used to create containment lines and control the fire. Rain in the weeks leading up to the burn (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), meant that the fuel was moist and the vegetation and leaf litter was difficult to ignite and hence, spread slowly. As the temperature increased as the sun passed over the site, the fire spread more easily. Some plants species, such as \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e, were especially slow to catch fire, requiring encouragement to alight through dried \u003cem\u003eGulgadya\u003c/em\u003e leaves (Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Some of the previously cut \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e stems did not fully burn. Average wind speed was 17.25 km/h in the morning and 16.25 km/h in the afternoon, with a mean maximum temperature of 23\u0026deg;C and minimum of 12.4\u0026deg;C over the four days (Bureau of Meteorology, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). There was also substantial rain in the week following the burn (~\u0026thinsp;13.26 mm) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4. Biocultural monitoring\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt each impact and control site, we established six 15x10m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e grids with three nested 1m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e quadrats in each grid cell using randomly generated coordinates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The following assessments were undertaken within this schema.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4.1. Cultural guwiyang assessment\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess fuel hazard changes at the impact site before and after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, leaf litter depth (mm) was measured using a ruler within each quadrat. Additionally, percentage vegetation cover below 2 m was visually estimated as a measure of near-surface (\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.6 m) and elevated (0.6\u0026ndash;2 m) fuel strata, as defined by Hines et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). These low-mid storey cover data were combined into a single metric for rapid assessment. At nine to ten ignition points on each of the three burn days, we measured: (1) the rate of spread (how many metres the fire moved in one-minute); and (2) the visually estimated flame height at each ignition point (McStephen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; AFAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Following the burn, we measured scorch height and proportion of area burned (patchiness) in each 1 m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e quadrat (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18) (Ooi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; McStephen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4.2. Dharug plant surveys\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDharug plant surveys were conducted before (early April 2024) and after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (mid-July 2024) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Dharug collaborators identified the following three plant species of interest for the fire response monitoring: \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e (narrow-leaved geebung, \u003cem\u003ePersoonia linearis\u003c/em\u003e). Within the 1m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e quadrats, we counted living \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e stems and estimated \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e frond percentage cover. Within each grid cell, we assessed culturally valued and fire responsive Dharug bushfood/medicine \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e (Morrison \u0026amp; Renwick, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) by counting the number of resprouting shoots at the base of adult plants (Morrison \u0026amp; Renwick, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Benwell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), with cluster of shoots counted as one.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4.3. Soil properties\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSoil samples were taken at randomly generated locations within each grid cell at each site, one week before and one week following the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Soil samples were collected using a 10cm steel core ring and placed in sealed plastic bags and stored at 4\u0026deg;C prior to analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom each sample, a 50 g sub-sample was weighed and oven-dried at 105\u0026deg;C for four days, then re-weighed to determine soil water content (differential weighing method; (O\u0026rsquo;Kelly, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). After weighing 10 g sub-samples, rocks and organic material (e.g., leaf debris, twigs) were removed, and the remaining soil was finely ground. From this, we measured carbon content (loss on ignition), pH and electrical conductivity. For loss on ignition, 3g of soil was placed in a crucible, heated at 550\u0026deg;C for four hours, and re-weighed (Hoogsteen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). pH and electrical conductivity were measured from a 1:5 soil-to-water solution (5 g soil:25 g water) using a Multi-parameter PCSTestr 35 probe.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4.5. Fauna survey\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eCamera traps were used to detect ground-dwelling Dharug target animals across four survey periods: six months before (September/October 2023), six weeks before (March/April 2024), immediately after (May/June 2024) and three months after (July/August 2024) the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Six Reconyx HP2W cameras were deployed at each site with one placed in each grid cell, approximately 15m apart, for 35 trap days per period. Cameras were fixed to trees, and vegetation was cleared directly in front of the camera to avoid false triggers. Cameras were set to white flash, capturing three pictures per second with high sensitivity. Cameras were placed 40cm above ground and facing down at a 45 degree angle (Meek et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Gigliotti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). A peanut butter, honey and oat lure was used in a PVC pipe bait station (Paull et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), mounted on a star picket with cable ties, and placed 1.2m from the camera. An active \u0026lsquo;lure\u0026rsquo; survey approach was adopted, to increase likelihood of animal detection and strengthen data analysis (following Miritis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Watchorn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR118\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Fauna monitoring methods were approved by Macquarie University Animal Ethics Committee (Reference number: 520251964364056) and consent for monitoring was approved by NSW National Parks and Wildlife Services (Reference number: DOC22/1022834).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5. Data analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDuring the Dharug \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, one grid cell did not burn, so only five cells from each monitoring grid were used for each site to balance the data. Statistical tests were dependent on data characteristics, including distribution, sample size, and study design (see Supplementary Table S1 for a summary of statistical analysis type). All analyses were undertaken using R Studio (Version 12.1; R Core Team, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5.1. Fire intensity and fuel hazard analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt the impact site, paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to assess differences in leaf litter depth and vegetation cover below 2m, and means were interpreted against fuel hazard strata thresholds defined by Hines et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Fire intensity measures were averaged across samples and reported as means with standard error and sample size. Observed fire intensity was determined using standard fire monitoring codes developed by McStephen (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5.2. Plant analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e reshooting stems were log-transformed and analysed using linear mixed effects models (grid number as random effect), to assess any differences between the impact site and two of the three control sites where they were present. Residual diagnostics were conducted to evaluate assumptions of normality and homoscedasticity, alongside a Shapiro\u0026ndash;Wilk test for normality of residuals.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo compare living \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e stem counts and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e frond cover before and after the fire, we used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, given the non-normal distribution of the data and the repeated-measures design. These were only analysed at the impact site, \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, as they were limited at the control sites, and the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e wished to understand whether this species would decline in abundance after the cultural burn.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5.3. Soil analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach soil property (pH, EC, soil moisture and carbon content) was analysed individually using linear mixed effects models (grid number as random effect) to assess any potential impact of the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e compared to all control sites. Residual diagnostics were conducted to evaluate assumptions of normality and homoscedasticity for each model. Additionally, Shapiro\u0026ndash;Wilk tests were used to test for normality of residuals.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5.4. Fauna analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor each animal detection, camera trap images were tagged with date, event duration (start and end time) and species (\u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e (Swamp wallaby; \u003cem\u003eWallabia bicolor\u003c/em\u003e) and \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e (Long-nosed bandicoot; \u003cem\u003ePerameles nasuta\u003c/em\u003e)). Given the close proximity of cameras within each site and the small scale of the burn, we pooled detections from all cameras within a site to avoid pseudo-replication and overinflating detection estimates. For each site, daily species detections were aggregated and recorded as present (1) or absent (0) per day within each survey period (Miritis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Presence/absence data were aggregated across survey periods, with the response variable defined as species activity (Parkins et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Miritis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Watchorn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR118\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) that was calculated as the number of days present divided by the total number of days within each survey period.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess whether \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e activity responded to the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, we employed generalised linear models (GLMs) with binomial errors and a logit link function for each species (Bolker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Pardini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The model tested whether the interaction between survey period and treatment type (the BACI effect) explained significant variation in species activity (as in Pardini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The two pre-burn surveys were grouped as \u0026lsquo;before\u0026rsquo; and the two post-burn surveys as \u0026lsquo;after\u0026rsquo;. In the model, \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e was specified as the impact site and used as the reference level, while the three control sites were included individually to enable direct comparisons. All models were fit using the \u003cem\u003eglm\u003c/em\u003e function from base R. The significance of fixed effects was assessed using Type III Wald\u0026rsquo;s χ\u0026sup2; tests (likelihood ratio tests) using the \u003cem\u003ecar\u003c/em\u003e package (Bolker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Fox \u0026amp; Weisberg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Model fit was evaluated using McFadden\u0026rsquo;s R\u0026sup2;, calculated with the \u003cem\u003epscl\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eperformance\u003c/em\u003e packages. Assumptions were assessed using \u003cem\u003eDHARMa\u003c/em\u003e package to examine residual distributions and check for overdispersion. Post hoc pairwise comparisons of estimated marginal means were conducted using the \u003cem\u003eemmeans\u003c/em\u003e package to test before-after changes within each site.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1. Cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e intensity and fuel hazard assessment\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFollowing \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, there was a significant reduction in surface fine fuel loads (V\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;114, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002); mean leaf litter depth declined from 30.3 mm (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.6mm SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) to 8.3 mm (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.4mm SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15). According to Hines et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), this shift reflected a reduction in surface fuel hazard from high (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;20 mm) to low (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;10 mm). Similarly, mean vegetation cover below 2 m decreased from 58.0% (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;19.8% SE) to 19.0% (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.4% SE), a significant reduction in vertical fine fuel strata (V\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;119, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0009). Based on cover thresholds, this corresponded to a decline in fuel hazard from high (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;50%) to low\u0026ndash;moderate (10\u0026ndash;40%) across the near-surface and elevated fuel strata (Hines et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). During the burn, the estimated mean flame height was 0.96m (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1 SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;28) and the rate of spread was 0.48m/minute (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04m SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;28). On average, 52.67% (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.74% SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) of each quadrat was burnt and the mean scorch height was 1.1m (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.19m SE, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15). According to protocols outlined by McStephen (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), the observed fire intensity was low, as it was patchy, did not remove all the litter and ground stratum, and there was very low scorch with no canopy scorch.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2. Dharug plant responses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere were significantly more \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e shoots after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (β = -0.88, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.20, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The interaction effect indicated that the before-after changes at Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.72, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.29, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.021) and Terry\u0026rsquo;s Creek (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.88, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.29, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.006) were significantly different from the impact site. Post hoc results showed no significant change at Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek or Terry\u0026rsquo;s Creek (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.4), indicating that the observed increase was confined to the \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e site.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAfter the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, significant reductions in living \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e stems (V\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;28, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.022) and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e frond cover (V\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;75, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.005) were detected. However, new \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e fronds were observed within weeks after the fire.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Dharug soil responses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSoil moisture increased at all sites following the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, including at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e where the increase was statistically significant (β = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;10.5, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.11, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). However, no significant interaction was found between site and survey period, indicating that similar increases were also observed at control sites (Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek: β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.99, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.27; Middle Site: β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.47, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.22; Terry\u0026rsquo;s Creek: β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.30, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo significant changes were detected in soil carbon, pH, or electrical conductivity after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, and no significant interaction effects were found between site and survey period, indicating that any variation observed at the impact site was comparable to that at control sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e; see Supplementary Table S2 for full model outputs).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Dharug fauna responses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe found no substantial effect of the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e on either target fauna species over the study period compared to the control sites. \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e activity before and after the \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e did not significantly differ from other sites (χ\u0026sup2; = 2.54, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.468). Model-estimated activity probabilities showed a significant decline in \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e activity across all sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e; see Supplementary Table S3 for full model outputs). At \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, activity dropped sharply (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0002), representing an ~\u0026thinsp;8.6-fold reduction. Similar but less pronounced declines were observed at the control sites: Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek declined\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;2.7-fold (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.045); Middle Site\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;4.1-fold (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.017); and Terry\u0026rsquo;s Creek\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;4.5-fold (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.011). DHARMa residual diagnostics indicated no evidence of overdispersion or poor model fit. The model explained 34.6% of the variance in \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e activity (McFadden\u0026rsquo;s R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e), indicating a moderately strong fit.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eChanges in \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e activity before and after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e differed between sites (χ\u0026sup2; = 16.70, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). At Middle Site, activity was reduced by nearly half (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). In contrast, there were no significant differences before-after fire at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (~\u0026thinsp;1.3-fold, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.177), Devlin\u0026rsquo;s Creek (~\u0026thinsp;1.2-fold decline, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.309) or Terry\u0026rsquo;s Creek (~\u0026thinsp;1.1-fold decline, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.396). Residual diagnostics confirmed appropriate model fit and no overdispersion. The model explained 20.6% of the variance in \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e activity (McFadden\u0026rsquo;s R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCultural guwiyang in urban landscapes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite growing international interest in and application of Indigenous cultural burning for ecological and cultural purposes, there is a paucity of burning and associated research in urban landscapes. The present paper addresses this research gap through cross-cultural monitoring of a Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e (women\u0026rsquo;s)-led cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (fire) event in the urban-bushland interface of Lane Cove National Park, Sydney, Australia. Ecocultural responses of the \u0026lsquo;other-than-humans\u0026rsquo; were varied and nuanced, but overall provided evidence for the low ecological impact of the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (Brown\u0026rsquo;s Waterhole), aligning with the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e objectives for the burn (Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) and other existing yet limited studies in south-eastern Australia (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Evidence of the low intensity and impacts of Indigenous-led cultural burns in urban areas is useful for guiding decisions about including Indigenous peoples and knowledge in urban ecosystem management and helps to reduce barriers related to fear and lack of data that influence fire management policies (Williamson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR120\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Notably, this \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e was planned and implemented by Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e, addressing a critical gap in practice and research regarding the impacts of cultural burning informed by Indigenous women\u0026rsquo;s values and gendered knowledge systems, which have historically been underrepresented (Sithole et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR108\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; James et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Cavanagh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Rey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFuel and fire behaviour of the cultural guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePost-burn reductions in surface fine fuels and near-surface/elevated fuels (Hines et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) suggest that this cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e lowered fuel hazards at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, aligning with one of the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e objectives. Burning intensity measures confirmed the patchy, low-intensity approach that was preferred by the Dharug women, aligning with other cultural burns studied in eastern Australia (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e fell within or below the recommended prescribed burning thresholds for rate of spread and flame height for sclerophyll forests (McCarthy, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; AFAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Cruz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings are noteworthy given the colonial legacy of distrust and suppression of Indigenous fire practices (Cahir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). While public attitudes are shifting, fear and concerns surrounding strategic fire use (such as escape risks, smoke and ecological consequences) often limit public support for burning in populated urban-bushland areas (Cortner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Bell \u0026amp; Oliveras, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Altangerel \u0026amp; Kull, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The results of the present study add to the growing evidence that cultural burning, like other low-intensity, patchy burns, can reduce fuel loads (McCarthy, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e), potentially contributing to a reduction in wildfire risks (Boer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Penman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) and protection of habitats for fire-sensitive species (Pastro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Paradoxically, there is also evidence for community concern that burning can be too frequent or intense in some cases, potentially affecting regeneration and fauna habitats (Altangerel \u0026amp; Kull, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). In this complex fire management context of the urban-bushland interface, cultural burning may offer a complementary approach to mainstream fire management, with not only ecological benefits and reduced wildfire risk, but also socio-cultural benefits that align with international and national goals for enhancing Indigenous inclusion in conservation and science (Price et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR96\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; McCormack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;Other-than-human\u0026rsquo; responses to the Bidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study provided data that affirmed the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e objectives for the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e including promotion of culturally valued plant species, particularly the medicine and food plant, \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e, which responded by producing regenerative shoots. This species of Geebung is known to tolerate both low- and high-intensity fires by resprouting from basal trunks, lignotubers, or root systems. Notably, low-intensity burns typically yield a higher number of shoots, which may enhance the long-term persistence of the species (Morrison \u0026amp; Renwick, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) and produce fresh shoots of medicinal value. However, it is important to consider that other factors, including reduced competition, increased light and nutrient availability, and altered climatic conditions, may have also contributed to the reshooting response (Benwell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e also aligned with the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e objective to reduce the abundance of \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e (hop bush) stems and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e (bracken) frond cover (in the short term), as evident by the minimal regrowth three months after the fire. While moderate-intensity fire has been shown to stimulate germination of \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e, the lack of post-fire recruitment detected in the three months after the event, suggested that the low intensity of the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e may not have reached the heat threshold required to break seed dormancy (Floyd, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1966\u003c/span\u003e). Ongoing monitoring will be essential to assess whether \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e re-establishes and to determine the potential of cultural burning as a longer-term management tool, particularly given that it has been observed to recolonise densely, albeit typically following higher-intensity prescribed fires (Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e also declined in the short-term following the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e. Although low-intensity fire is known to temporarily reduce the dominance of this species, recovery is strongly influenced by factors such as sunlight, canopy cover, and rainfall (Spencer \u0026amp; Baxter, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR111\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Fernanda \u0026amp; Pavel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In many cases, \u003cem\u003egurgi\u003c/em\u003e has been noted to return to pre-burn levels within six months, particularly in frequently burnt areas, given its ability to regenerate rapidly after fire through sprouting from dormant rhizomes (Tolhurst \u0026amp; Turvey, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR114\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e; Spencer \u0026amp; Baxter, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR111\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). As such, the long-term effectiveness of cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e in managing \u003cem\u003egurgi\u003c/em\u003e remains uncertain, and continued monitoring will be essential to determine whether repeated cultural burns can reduce dominance of this species over time.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSoils\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Dharug women also expressed interest in understanding changes in soil properties following the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, given the importance of soil in post-fire ecological recovery (Calderisi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). No significant change in soil carbon was detected, consistent with other low-intensity fire studies (e.g., Granged et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Plaza-\u0026Aacute;lvarez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, substantial increases in carbon have been observed following other Indigenous-led or moderate-intensity prescribed burns (Granged et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This has been attributed to black carbon produced from partially combusted material at lower temperatures (Xifr\u0026eacute;-Salvad\u0026oacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR122\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), which is often visible as black ash\u0026mdash;an indicator of cool-burning, also noted by the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e in conversation. In addition, no significant changes in soil moisture, pH, or electrical conductivity were measured after to the burn. While responses in soil moisture and pH vary across low-intensity fire studies (Granged et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), the stability of electrical conductivity observed here aligned with findings by Granged et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Overall, these outcomes likely reflect the low intensity and patchy coverage, along with post-fire rainfall and limited ash production from incomplete combustion, which together contributed to the minimal impact of the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e on soil properties (Granged et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Xifr\u0026eacute;-Salvad\u0026oacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR122\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Country et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFauna\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e also appeared to have limited effects on \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e (swamp wallaby) and \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e (long-nosed bandicoot) activity, reflecting the small scale and low impact of the burn. Previous research has shown that swamp wallabies can respond positively to recent burns, which stimulate the regrowth of preferred food sources such as fungi and grass shoots (Stefano et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR112\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Chard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, camera trap photos captured \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e feeding on newly emerged fungi and grasses within a month post-burn, coinciding with a slight, though non-significant, increase in activity, mirroring short-term trends observed by Chard et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Despite known preferences for areas with dense understorey (Fischer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), our results suggest that changes to low- and mid-storey vegetation following the burn did not deter \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e. This may be due to the patchy nature and small scale of the burn, which maintained surrounding refugial habitat and likely mitigated the increased predation risk from exposed understorey (Chard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e activity decreased across all sites, with the most pronounced drop observed at the burn site. While this reduction might indicate some sensitivity to fire, similar declines at the control sites suggest broader ecological or seasonal influences. \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e are considered well-adapted to small, low-intensity burns in peri-urban areas, particularly when unburnt patches and fire refugia are available (Hope, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). In their study of locally vulnerable \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e populations at North Head, Sydney, Scott et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) emphasised that maintaining a mosaic of open foraging areas alongside dense refuges, likely historically sustained by fire regimes, is a crucial management strategy for this species. They propose that this approach is particularly important in fragmented urban landscapes, where \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e populations face increased risks from introduced predators and motor vehicles. Nonetheless, structural habitat changes following the burn may have contributed to the decline in activity at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e, as \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e are known to prefer dense, unburnt vegetation and typically recolonise burnt areas gradually as cover regenerates (Arthur et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; MacGregor et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Mikac et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, short-term seasonal fluctuations and conditions were likely the over-riding factor that influenced \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e activity patterns in this study, given that these decreases were not unique to the impact site. \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e foraging is known to increase with warmer temperatures and moist soils that support invertebrates and hypogeous fungi, which are key food resources that decline under dry conditions (Claridge \u0026amp; Barry, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Hughes \u0026amp; Banks, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Reproductive activity in nearby urban-bushland populations was shown to peak in late spring and summer, declining during the colder months, likely due to energetic constraints and reduced food availability (Scott et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). This seasonal variation can, in turn, influence detection probabilities throughout the breeding season (MacGregor et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Taken together, cooler post-burn temperatures and fluctuating rainfall may have influenced both foraging and detectability of \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e across all sites. Long-term monitoring under similar seasonal conditions would be beneficial for disentangling fire-related effects from broader ecological trends.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mammal responses studied here are particularly relevant within urban-bushland interfaces, where remnant vegetation is fragmented, frequently disturbed, and bounded by residential development. In such landscapes, fauna must navigate a range of non-fire stressors, including habitat degradation, edge effects, and human activity that may compound or obscure responses to fire. The limited impacts observed here suggest that patchy, low-intensity cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e may be ecologically suitable in urban-bushland settings, supporting species by maintaining habitat mosaics (Scott et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). Such practices may offer a culturally grounded alternative to conventional prescribed burns that are often larger and hotter, contributing to a more nuanced approach to fire management in fragmented urban landscapes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eImplications for management\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study examined the impacts of a relatively small cultural burn in an urban National Park, providing rare insights into the responses of the ecocultural \u0026lsquo;other-than-human\u0026rsquo; entities. Due to bureaucratic processes, fears surrounding fire, and a lack of broader public understanding and trust of Indigenous fire in urban landscapes, the primary outcome of this research was to demonstrate that low-intensity cultural burns can be conducted with minimal impact. Using standard Western ecological measures, we showed that the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e-led \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e was low-intensity and patchy, effectively reducing surface and near-surface/elevated fuel loads, while having minimal biophysical impacts on plants, soils, and fauna. Additionally, we quantified the positive effects of the cultural \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e in decreasing the prevalence of dominant plant species whilst promoting a culturally valued, medicinal and food species. The results contribute to growing evidence that Indigenous-led fire events, when applied appropriately, can support healthy ecosystems, cultural revitalisation and mitigate wildfire risk (Cortner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, these outcomes underscore the importance of cross-cultural, two-way monitoring approaches which, in this context, combined Dharug knowledge with Western scientific methods, fostering opportunities for respectful collaboration, shared learning, and joint decision-making in fire management (Ens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Other cultural outcomes of this \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru guwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, as noted in a complementary publication (Rey et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), included increased confidence of the Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e to conduct burning in the urban-bushland interface. The burn also helped alleviate fears among neighbours and stakeholders, and community cohesion around the common goal of caring for \u003cem\u003eNgurra\u003c/em\u003e (Country) while reducing wildfire risk to local infrastructure. While the results of this burn and associated monitoring are promising, we recognise that they provide only a limited snapshot of the cultural and biophysical responses of the cultural burn. To gain a deeper understanding of changes and recovery, particularly concerning fauna, longer-term post-fire monitoring across a greater number of larger impact and control sites would be highly beneficial. Cross-cultural monitoring of the Dharug-led \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e captured context-specific responses from a small-scale burn in a fragmented, human-influenced landscape, so broader extrapolation should be approached with caution.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults from this study also suggest the likely benefit of follow-up burning to enhance Dharug desired outcomes and values for \u003cem\u003eNgurra\u003c/em\u003e. Follow-up burning may further suppress dominant or invasive flora and trigger regeneration from existing seed banks of fire-dependent species (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, burning at varied times of year at different sites could enhance the mosaic of vegetation types and growth stages, as well as refugia and resource availability for fauna (Bird et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, ongoing fire management through Indigenous-led burning within vulnerable urban-bushland interfaces may benefit local communities and ecosystems by reducing fuel loads and decreasing bushfire risks (McKemey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Hoffman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). By centring Dharug preferred cultural values and biophysical responses in the monitoring design, this study offers an example for how decolonised fire application and cross-cultural science can operate within highly regulated urban-bushland interfaces. These approaches are becoming increasingly relevant in global efforts to enhance Indigenous stewardship in climate-resilient land care.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provided rare empirical evidence of the ecological and cultural outcomes of an Indigenous women\u0026rsquo;s-led cultural burn within an urban-bushland interface. Globally, where Indigenous fire practices have been disrupted by colonisation, institutional barriers, and risk-averse policies, these findings demonstrate the potential for Indigenous-led burning to contribute meaningfully to biodiversity conservation, wildfire risk reduction, and the restoration of cultural relationships with Country, even in densely populated landscapes. By showcasing complementary, low-impact approaches to conventional fire management, this work strengthens the case for enabling Indigenous fire stewardship in urban areas as part of broader efforts to support Indigenous inclusion in environmental governance. In the face of escalating climate-driven fire risks, small-scale, low-intensity cultural burning presents an adaptive, place-based strategy to mitigate fire risk while enhancing ecocultural resilience in urban ecosystems. By centring Indigenous leadership and two-way knowledge exchange, this work offers an approach for reimagining fire management through culturally grounded and ecologically informed collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research was supported by the Macquarie University Higher Degree Research Fund (#4411/7124) and the Macquarie University Fellowship for Indigenous Researchers (MUFIR) scheme (#9061). The cultural burning component at \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (Brown\u0026rsquo;s Waterhole) was additionally funded by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), with Macquarie University providing the auspice for the funds.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by GB. The first draft of the manuscript was written by GB and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe respectfully acknowledge the Dharug Traditional Owners and extend our deep gratitude to the Dharug women who led and supported this project. We honour Dharug Elders past and present and recognise Dharug enduring custodianship of Country. We also thank Macquarie University student volunteers (Mathilde Schwietzer, Rafaela Duschek) and external volunteers (James Diacono) for their valuable assistance in the field, as well as the stakeholders who supported the project\u0026rsquo;s development and implementation, particularly NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service at Lane Cove National Park for facilitating access and monitoring. Special thanks to Alexandra Carthey for her expertise and support in analysing the fauna data\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during this study are not publicly available due to cultural and ethical considerations. The project involved co-designed monitoring with Dharug Traditional Owners, whose knowledge and values informed the research. Any requests for access to data should be made in consultation with the Dharug Women\u0026rsquo;s and Allies Cultural Fire Alliance and the corresponding author, and will be considered in line with principles of Indigenous data sovereignty and ethical research practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAFAC (2015) \u003cem\u003eNational guidelines for prescribed burning operations: Case Study 2 \u0026ndash; Burning young silvertop ash regrowth forests in NSW. Report for National Burning Project \u0026ndash; Subproject 4\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAltangerel K, Kull CA (2013) The prescribed burning debate in Australia: conflicts and compatibilities. J Environ Planning Manage 56(1):103\u0026ndash;120. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.652831\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09640568.2011.652831\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnsell J, Evans J (2019) Contemporary Aboriginal savanna burning projects in Arnhem Land: a regional description and analysis of the fire management aspirations of Traditional Owners. Int J Wildland Fire 29(5):371\u0026ndash;385. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF18152\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF18152\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArthur AD, Catling PC, Reid A (2012) Relative influence of habitat structure, species interactions and rainfall on the post-fire population dynamics of ground‐dwelling vertebrates. Austral Ecol 37(8):958\u0026ndash;970. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2011.02355.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.2011.02355.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAtkinson A, Montiel-Molina C (2023) Reconnecting fire culture of Aboriginal communities with contemporary wildfire risk management. Fire 6(8):296. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/fire6080296\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/fire6080296\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAttenbrow V (2010) Sydney's Aboriginal past: investigating the archaeological and historical records. Unsw\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBartlett C, Marshall M, Marshall A (2012) Two-eyed seeing and other lessons learned within a co-learning journey of bringing together indigenous and mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing. J Environ Stud Sci 2:331\u0026ndash;340. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-012-0086-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13412-012-0086-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBell T, Oliveras I (2006) Perceptions of prescribed burning in a local forest community in Victoria, Australia. Environ Manage 38(5):867\u0026ndash;878. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0290-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00267-005-0290-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBento-Gon\u0026ccedil;alves A, Vieira A (2020) Wildfires in the wildland-urban interface: Key concepts and evaluation methodologies. Sci Total Environ 707:135592. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135592\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135592\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBenwell A (2024) Fire responses of flora in a sclerophyll\u0026ndash;rainforest vegetation complex in the Nightcap Range, North Coast, New South Wales. Aust J Bot 72(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/BT23049\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/BT23049\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBessarab D, Ng'Andu B (2010) Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous research. Int J Crit Indigenous Stud 3(1):37\u0026ndash;50. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.v3i1.57\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5204/ijcis.v3i1.57\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBird DW, Bird B, R., Parker CH (2004) Women Who Hunt with Fire: Aboriginal Resource Use and Fire Regimes in Australia's Western Desert. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2004(1), 90\u0026ndash;96\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBird RB, Bird DW, Fernandez LE, Taylor N, Taylor W, Nimmo D (2018) Aboriginal burning promotes fine-scale pyrodiversity and native predators in Australia's Western Desert. Biol Conserv 219:110\u0026ndash;118. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.01.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2018.01.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlack MP, Mooney SD (2007) The response of Aboriginal burning practices to population levels and El Ni\u0026ntilde;o\u0026ndash;Southern Oscillation events during the mid-to late-Holocene: a case study from the Sydney Basin using charcoal and pollen analysis. Aust Geogr 38(1):37\u0026ndash;52. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00049180601175857\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00049180601175857\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBoer MM, Sadler RJ, Wittkuhn RS, McCaw L, Grierson PF (2009) Long-term impacts of prescribed burning on regional extent and incidence of wildfires\u0026mdash;Evidence from 50 years of active fire management in SW Australian forests. For Ecol Manag 259(1):132\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White J-SS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24(3):127\u0026ndash;135. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourke M, Atkinson A, Neale T (2020) Putting Country back together: a conversation about collaboration and Aboriginal fire management. Postcolonial Stud 23(4):546\u0026ndash;551. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2020.1751909\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13688790.2020.1751909\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowd EJ, Cary GJ, Freeman D, Bell-Garner B, Lindenmayer D (2025) Plant Responses to a Re‐emergence of Cultural Burning in Long‐Unburnt, Threatened Temperate Woodlands. Glob Change Biol 31(6):e70230. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70230\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/gcb.70230\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowman D, Panton W (1995) Munmarlary revisited: response of a north Australian Eucalyptus tetrodonta savanna protected from fire for 20 years. Aust J Ecol 20(4):526\u0026ndash;531. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1995.tb00571.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.1995.tb00571.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBradstock RA, Gill A, Kenny B, Scott J (1998) Bushfire risk at the urban interface estimated from historical weather records: consequences for the use of prescribed fire in the Sydney region of south-eastern Australia. J Environ Manage 52(3):259\u0026ndash;271. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1997.0177\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1006/jema.1997.0177\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrook J, Kohen JL (1991) The Parramatta native institution and the black town: A history. No Title)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBureau of Meteorology (2025) \u003cem\u003eClimate Data Online\u003c/em\u003e. Retrieved 6 May 2025 from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/?ref=ftr\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/?ref=ftr\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCahir F, Clark I, Clarke P (2018) Aboriginal biocultural knowledge in south-eastern Australia: Perspectives of early colonists. Csiro Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/9781486306121\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/9781486306121\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCalderisi G, Salaris E, Cogoni D, Rossetti I, Murtas F, Fenu G (2025) Relationship Between Post-Fire Vegetation Recovery and Soil Temperature in the Mediterranean Forest. Fire 8(3):91. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/fire8030091\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/fire8030091\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCavanagh V (2022) The (re) emergence of Aboriginal women and cultural burning in New South Wales, Australia. Global Application of Prescribed Fire, p 86\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChard M, Foster CN, Lindenmayer DB, Cary GJ, MacGregor C, Blanchard W (2021) Time Since Fire Influences Macropod Occurrence in a Fire-prone Coastal Ecosystem. Austral Ecol 47(3):507\u0026ndash;518. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13127\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/aec.13127\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChristianson A (2014) Social science research on Indigenous wildfire management in the 21st century and future research needs. Int J Wildland Fire 24(2):190\u0026ndash;200. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF13048\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF13048\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClaridge AW, Barry SC (2000) Factors influencing the distribution of medium-sized ground‐dwelling mammals in southeastern mainland Australia. Austral Ecol 25(6):676\u0026ndash;688. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2000.tb00074.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.2000.tb00074.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClark SS, McLoughlin LC (1986) Historical and biological evidence for fire regimes in the Sydney region prior to the arrival of Europeans: implications for future bushland management. Aust Geogr 17(2):101\u0026ndash;112. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00049188608702909\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00049188608702909\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCortner HJ, Gardner PD, Taylor JG (1990) Fire hazards at the urban-wildland interface: What the public expects. Environ Manage 14:57\u0026ndash;62. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394019\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/BF02394019\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCountry M, Davis J, Simmons J, Snelson S, Channell V, Haynes K, Deutscher N, Brook L, Dosseto A (2024) Quantitative Assessment of the Effect of Agency-Led Prescribed Burns and Cultural Burns on Soil Properties in Southeastern Australia. Fire 7(3):75. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/fire7030075\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/fire7030075\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCruz M, Gould J, Alexander M, Sullivan A, McCaw W, Matthews S (2015) \u003cem\u003eA guide to the rate of fire spread models for Australian vegetation. Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council Ltd. And Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation., Melbourne, Vic\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDanielsen F, Burgess ND, Balmford A (2005) Monitoring matters: examining the potential of locally-based approaches. Biodivers Conserv 14(11):2507\u0026ndash;2542. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-8375-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10531-005-8375-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDarques R (2015) Mediterranean cities under fire. A critical approach to the wildland\u0026ndash;urban interface. Appl Geogr 59:10\u0026ndash;21. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.02.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.02.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavid B, Fletcher M-S, Connor S, Pullin VR, Birkett-Rees J, Delannoy J-J, Mariani M, Romano A, Maezumi SY (2024) Cultural Burning. Elements in Current Archaeological Tools and Techniques. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/9781009485340\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/9781009485340\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDCCEEW (2010) \u003cem\u003eNPWS Fire History \u0026ndash; Wildfires and Prescribed Burns\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/fire-history-wildfires-and-prescribed-burns-1e8b6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/fire-history-wildfires-and-prescribed-burns-1e8b6\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDCCEEW (2020) \u003cem\u003eNSW State Vegetation Type Map\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/nsw-state-vegetation-type-map\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://datasets.seed.nsw.gov.au/dataset/nsw-state-vegetation-type-map\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDepartment of Planning, I. a. E (2021) \u003cem\u003eAustralian Soil Classification (ASC) Soil Type map of NSW\u003c/em\u003e Version Version 4.5)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eD\u0026iacute;az SC, Quezada LC, \u0026Aacute;lvarez LJ, Loj\u0026aacute;n-C\u0026oacute;rdova J, Carri\u0026oacute;n-Paladines V (2023) Indigenous use of fire in the paramo ecosystem of southern Ecuador: A case study using remote sensing methods and ancestral knowledge of the Kichwa Saraguro people. Fire Ecol 19(1):5. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-022-00164-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s42408-022-00164-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDickson-Hoyle S, St̓uxwt\u0026eacute;ws, Corporation SNR, Eatherton A, Baron JN, Tiribelli F, Daniels LD (2024) Fire severity drives understory community dynamics and the recovery of culturally significant plants. Ecosphere 15(3):e4795. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4795\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ecs2.4795\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEloy L, Bilbao A, Mistry B, J., Schmidt IB (2019) From fire suppression to fire management: Advances and resistances to changes in fire policy in the savannas of Brazil and Venezuela. Geographical J 185(1):10\u0026ndash;22. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12245\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/geoj.12245\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEns EJ, Pert P, Clarke PA, Budden M, Clubb L, Doran B, Douras C, Gaikwad J, Gott B, Leonard S, Locke J, Packer J, Turpin G, Wason S (2015) Indigenous biocultural knowledge in ecosystem science and management: Review and insight from Australia. Biol Conserv 181:133\u0026ndash;149. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEns EJ, Turpin G (2022) Synthesis of Australian cross-cultural ecology featuring a decade of annual Indigenous ecological knowledge symposia at the Ecological Society of Australia conferences. Ecological management \u0026amp; restoration, 23(3\u0026ndash;16. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12539\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/emr.12539\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFernanda T, Pavel D (2022) Fire has short-term negative effects on a super-dominant native fern, Pteridium arachnoideum (Dennstaedtiaceae), in a Brazilian savanna. Nat Conserv Res Заповедная наука 7(3):15\u0026ndash;25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2022.027\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.24189/ncr.2022.027\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFischer M, Stefano JD, Gras P, Kramer-Schadt S, Sutherland DR, Coulson G, Stillfried M (2019) Circadian Rhythms Enable Efficient Resource Selection in a Human‐modified Landscape. Ecol Evol 9(13):7509\u0026ndash;7527. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5283\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ece3.5283\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFitzgibbon SI, Wilson RS, Goldizen AW (2011) The behavioural ecology and population dynamics of a cryptic ground-dwelling mammal in an urban Australian landscape. Austral Ecol 36(6):722\u0026ndash;732. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2010.02209.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.2010.02209.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFletcher M-S, Romano A, Connor S, Mariani M, Maezumi SY (2021) Catastrophic bushfires, indigenous fire knowledge and reframing science in Southeast Australia. Fire 4(3):61. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/fire4030061\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/fire4030061\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFloyd A (1966) Effect of fire upon weed seeds in the wet sclerophyll forests of northern New South Wales. Aust J Bot 14(2):243\u0026ndash;256. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/BT9660243\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/BT9660243\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFox J, Weisberg S (2018) An R companion to applied regression. Sage publications. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.32614/CRAN.package.carData\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.32614/CRAN.package.carData\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFreeman D, Williamson B, Weir J (2021) Cultural burning and public sector practice in the Australian Capital Territory. Aust Geogr 52(2):111\u0026ndash;129. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2021.1917133\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00049182.2021.1917133\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGammage B (2013) The biggest estate on earth\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGigliotti LC, Curveira-Santos G, Slotow R, Sholto‐Douglas C, Swanepoel LH, Jachowski DS (2022) Community‐level responses of African carnivores to prescribed burning. J Appl Ecol 59(1):251\u0026ndash;262. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14050\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1365-2664.14050\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGranged AJ, Jord\u0026aacute;n A, Zavala LM, Mu\u0026ntilde;oz-Rojas M, Mataix-Solera J (2011) Short-term effects of experimental fire for a soil under eucalyptus forest (SE Australia). Geoderma 167:125\u0026ndash;134. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.09.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.09.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHines F, Hines F, Tolhurst KG, Wilson AA, McCarthy GJ (2010) Overall fuel hazard assessment guide. Victorian Government, Department of Sustainability and Environment East \u0026hellip;\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoffman KM, Christianson AC, Dickson-Hoyle S, Copes-Gerbitz K, Nikolakis W, Diabo DA, McLeod R, Michell HJ, Mamun AA, Zahara A (2022) The right to burn: barriers and opportunities for Indigenous-led fire stewardship in Canada. Facets 7(1):464\u0026ndash;481. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0062\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1139/facets-2021-0062\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoffman KM, Davis EL, Wickham SB, Schang K, Johnson A, Larking T, Lauriault PN, Le Q, Swerdfager N, E., Trant AJ (2021) Conservation of Earth\u0026rsquo;s biodiversity is embedded in Indigenous fire stewardship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(32), e2105073118. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2105073118\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/pnas.2105073118\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoogsteen MJ, Lantinga EA, Bakker EJ, Groot JC, Tittonell PA (2015) Estimating soil organic carbon through loss on ignition: effects of ignition conditions and structural water loss. Eur J Soil Sci 66(2):320\u0026ndash;328. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.12224\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/ejss.12224\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHope B (2012) Short-term response of the long-nosed bandicoot, Perameles nasuta, and the southern brown bandicoot, Isoodon obesulus obesulus, to low-intensity prescribed fire in heathland vegetation. Wildl Res (East Melbourne) 39(8):731\u0026ndash;744. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WR12110\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WR12110\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHughes NK, Banks PB (2011) Heading for greener pastures? Defining the foraging preferences of urban long-nosed bandicoots. Australian J Zool 58(6):341\u0026ndash;349. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/ZO10051\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/ZO10051\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJames R, Gibbs B, Whitford L, Leisher C, Konia R, Butt N (2021) Conservation and natural resource management: where are all the women? Oryx 55(6):860\u0026ndash;867. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605320001349\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0030605320001349\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJurskis V, Underwood R (2013) Human fires and wildfires on Sydney sandstones: history informs management. Fire Ecol 9:8\u0026ndash;24. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4996/fireecology.0903008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4996/fireecology.0903008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKarskens G (2009) The colony: A history of early Sydney. Allen \u0026amp; Unwin\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKirkpatrick JB, Driessen MM, Jarman PJ, Jakob L (2023) Influences of adjacent suburbia, fire regimes and vegetation on the mammals of a peri-urban reserve. Urban Ecosyst 26(4):905\u0026ndash;916. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01355-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-023-01355-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKohen JL (1986) \u003cem\u003ePrehistoric settlement in the Western Cumberland Plain: resources, environment and technology\u003c/em\u003e Macquarie University]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLake FK, Christianson AC (2020) Indigenous fire stewardship. In \u003cem\u003eEncyclopedia of wildfires and wildland-urban interface (WUI) fires\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 714\u0026ndash;722). Springer. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52090-2_225\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-319-52090-2_225\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLegge S, Bijlani H, Taylor B, Shovellor J, McCarthy F, Murray C, Ala\u0026rsquo;i J, Brown C, Tromp K, Bayley S (2024) Pirra Jungku and Pirra Warlu: using traditional fire-practice knowledge and contemporary science to guide fire-management goals for desert animals. Wildl Res 51(10). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WR24069\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WR24069\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiebenberg L (2012) The CyberTracker Story. Unpublished report\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacGregor CI, Blanchard W, Stein JA, Lindenmayer DB (2020) Factors influencing the occurrence of the Southern Long-nosed Bandicoot (Perameles nasuta Geoffroy) during a population irruption and decline. Austral Ecol 45(6):834\u0026ndash;844. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12930\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/aec.12930\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacGregor CI, Wood JT, Dexter N, Lindenmayer DB (2013) Home range size and use by the long-nosed bandicoot (Perameles nasuta) following fire. Australian Mammalogy 35(2):206\u0026ndash;216. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/AM12032\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/AM12032\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaclagan SJ, Coates T, Ritchie EG (2018) Don't judge habitat on its novelty: Assessing the value of novel habitats for an endangered mammal in a peri-urban landscape. Biol Conserv 223:11\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.04.022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2018.04.022\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCarthy GJ (2004) Surface fine fuel hazard rating: Forest fuels in east gippsland. Department of Sustainability and Environment\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCormack P, McKemey M, Costello O (2024) \u003cem\u003eIdentifying and overcoming legal barriers to cultural burning\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcKemey M, Patterson M, Rangers B, Ens EJ, Reid NC, Hunter JT, Costello O, Ridges M, Miller C (2019) Cross-cultural monitoring of a cultural keystone species informs revival of indigenous burning of country in South-Eastern Australia. Human Ecology, 47(893\u0026ndash;904. https://doi.org/0.1007/s10745-019-00120-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcKemey M, Patterson ML, Hunter J, Ridges M, Ens E, Miller C, Costello O, Reid N (2021) Indigenous cultural burning had less impact than wildfire on the threatened Backwater grevillea (Grevillea scortechinii subsp. sarmentosa) while effectively decreasing fuel loads. Int J Wildland Fire 30(10):745\u0026ndash;756. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF20135\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF20135\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcKemey MB, Rangers B, Rangers YM, Costello O, Hunter JT, Ens EJ (2022) Right-way\u0026rsquo;science: reflections on co‐developing Indigenous and Western cross‐cultural knowledge to support Indigenous cultural fire management. Ecol Manage Restor 23:75\u0026ndash;82. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12532\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/emr.12532\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcLoughlin LC (1998) Season of burning in the Sydney region: the historical records compared with recent prescribed burning. Aust J Ecol 23(4):393\u0026ndash;404. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1998.tb00744.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.1998.tb00744.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcStephen M (2014) \u003cem\u003eFire and Biodiversity Monitoring Manual\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeek PD, Fleming P, Ballard G (2012) An introduction to camera trapping for wildlife surveys in Australia. Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre Canberra, Australia\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMikac KM, Knipler ML, Gracanin A, Newbery MS (2023) Ground dwelling mammal response to fire: a case study from Monga National Park after the 2019/2020 Clyde Mountain fire. Austral Ecol 48(1):19\u0026ndash;23. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13109\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/aec.13109\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiritis V, Dickman CR, Nimmo DG, Doherty TS (2024) After the \u0026lsquo;Black Summer\u0026rsquo;fires: Faunal responses to megafire depend on fire severity, proportional area burnt and vegetation type. J Appl Ecol 61(1):63\u0026ndash;75. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14545\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1365-2664.14545\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorrison DA, Renwick JA (2000) Effects of variation in fire intensity on regeneration of co-occurring species of small trees in the Sydney region. Aust J Bot 48(1):71\u0026ndash;79. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/BT98054\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/BT98054\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNeale T, Carter R, Nelson T, Bourke M (2019) Walking together: a decolonising experiment in bushfire management on Dja Dja Wurrung country. Cult geographies 26(3):341\u0026ndash;359. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1474474018821419\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1474474018821419\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNgurra D, Dadd L, Glass P, Scott R, Graham M, Judge S, Hodge P, Suchet-Pearson S (2019) Yanama budyari gumada: reframing the urban to care as Darug Country in western Sydney. Aust Geogr 50(3):279\u0026ndash;293. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2019.1601150\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00049182.2019.1601150\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNgurra D, Dadd L, Norman C, Scott R, Tynan L, Graham M, Suchet-Pearson S, Narwal H, Lemire J (2025) Biyani Guwiyang Dharug Ngurrawa: healing fire on Dharug country. Ecosyst People 21(1):2495016. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2025.2495016\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/26395916.2025.2495016\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNikolakis W, Ross RM (2022) Rebuilding Yunesit\u0026rsquo;in fire (Qwen) stewardship: Learnings from the land. Forestry Chron 98(1):36\u0026ndash;43. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5558/tfc2022-001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5558/tfc2022-001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Kelly BC (2004) Accurate determination of moisture content of organic soils using the oven drying method. Drying Technol 22(7):1767\u0026ndash;1776. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1081/DRT-200025642\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1081/DRT-200025642\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOffice of Environment and Heritage (2016) \u003cem\u003eLane Cove National Park Plan of Management\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOoi MK, Whelan RJ, Auld TD (2006) Persistence of obligate-seeding species at the population scale: effects of fire intensity, fire patchiness and long fire-free intervals. Int J Wildland Fire 15(2):261\u0026ndash;269. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF05024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF05024\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePardini EA, Parsons LS, Ştefan V, Knight TM (2018) GLMM BACI environmental impact analysis shows coastal dune restoration reduces seed predation on an endangered plant. Restor Ecol 26(6):1190\u0026ndash;1194. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12678\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/rec.12678\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParkins K, Scott A, Di Stefano J, Swan M, Sitters H, York A (2019) Habitat use at fire edges: does animal activity follow temporal patterns of habitat change? For Ecol Manag 451:117343. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.05.013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foreco.2019.05.013\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePascoe J, Shanks M, Pascoe B, Clarke J, Goolmeer T, Moggridge B, Williamson B, Miller M, Costello O, Fletcher MS (2023) Lighting a pathway: Our obligation to culture and Country. Ecol Manage Restor 24(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12592\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/emr.12592\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePastro LA, Dickman CR, Letnic M (2011) Burning for biodiversity or burning biodiversity? Prescribed burn vs. wildfire impacts on plants, lizards, and mammals. Ecol Appl 21(8):3238\u0026ndash;3253. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1890/10-2351.1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1890/10-2351.1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaull DJ, Claridge AW, Barry SC (2011) There\u0026rsquo;s no accounting for taste: bait attractants and infrared digital cameras for detecting small to medium ground-dwelling mammals. Wildl Res 38(3):188\u0026ndash;195. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WR10203\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WR10203\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePenman TD, Christie FJ, Andersen AN, Bradstock RA, Cary GJ, Henderson MK, Price O, Tran C, Wardle GM, Williams RJ (2011) Prescribed burning: how can it work to conserve the things we value? Int J Wildland Fire 20(6):721\u0026ndash;733. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF09131\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF09131\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePlaza-\u0026Aacute;lvarez PA, Lucas-Borja ME, Sagra J, Moya D, Font\u0026uacute;rbel T, De las Heras J (2017) Soil respiration changes after prescribed fires in Spanish black pine (Pinus nigra Arn. ssp. salzmannii) monospecific and mixed forest stands. Forests 8(7):248. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/f8070248\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/f8070248\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePrice OF, Russell-Smith J, Watt F (2012) The influence of prescribed fire on the extent of wildfire in savanna landscapes of western Arnhem Land, Australia. Int J Wildland Fire 21(3):297\u0026ndash;305. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WF10079\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WF10079\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR Core Team (2024) \u003cem\u003eR: A language and environment for statistical computing.\u003c/em\u003e In R Foundation for Statistical Computing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.R-project.org\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.R-project.org\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRawluk A, Neale T, Smith W, Doherty T, Ritchie E, Pascoe J, Murray M, Carter R, Bourke M, Falconer S (2023) Tomorrow\u0026rsquo;s Country: Practice-oriented principles for Indigenous cultural fire research in south‐east Australia. Geographical Res 61(3):333\u0026ndash;348. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12596\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1745-5871.12596\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReidy M, Chevalier W, McDonald T (2005) Lane Cove National Park Bushcare volunteers: taking stock, 10 years on. Ecol Manage Restor 6(2):94\u0026ndash;104. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2005.00225.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-8903.2005.00225.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRey JA (2021) Indigenous identity as country: The Ing within connecting, caring, and belonging. Genealogy 5(2):48. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy5020048\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/genealogy5020048\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRey JA (2022) Quiet activism through Dharug Ngurra: Reporting locally grown\u0026ndash;not from the European South1. Eur South 10:25\u0026ndash;40\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRey JA, Norman CW, Brennan G, Ens E, Norman-Hill R (2025) Burning Love\u0026rsquo;, Living Ngurra: Healing Country, Healing Hearts and Sharing Minds in Dharug Country. J Global Indigeneity 9(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.54760/001c.138509\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.54760/001c.138509\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobinson NM, Scheele BC, Legge S, Southwell D, Carter O, Lintermans M, Radford JQ, Skroblin A, Dickman CR, Koleck J, Wayne AF, Kanowski J, Gillespie GR, Lindenmayer DB (2018) How to Ensure Threatened Species Monitoring Leads to Threatened Species Conservation. Ecol Manage Restor 19(3):222\u0026ndash;229. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12335\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/emr.12335\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRussell-Smith J, Cook GD, Cooke PM, Edwards AC, Lendrum M, Meyer C, Whitehead PJ (2013) Managing fire regimes in north Australian savannas: applying Aboriginal approaches to contemporary global problems. Front Ecol Environ 11(s1):e55\u0026ndash;e63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1890/120251\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1890/120251\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRussell-Smith J, Lucas D, Gapindi M, Gunbunuka B, Kapirigi N, Namingum G, Lucas K, Giuliani P, Chaloupka G (1997) Aboriginal resource utilization and fire management practice in western Arnhem Land, monsoonal northern Australia: notes for prehistory, lessons for the future. Hum Ecol 25(2):159\u0026ndash;195. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021970021670\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1023/A:1021970021670\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRussell-Smith J, Whitehead P, Cooke P (2009) Culture, ecology and economy of fire management in North Australian savannas: rekindling the Wurrk tradition. Csiro Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/9780643098299\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/9780643098299\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScott LK, Hume ID, Dickman CR (1999) Ecology and population biology of long-nosed bandicoots () at North Head, Sydney Harbour National Park. Wildl Res (East Melbourne) 26(6):805\u0026ndash;821. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/WR98074\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/WR98074\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSithole B, Hunter-Xenie H, Williams wL, Saegenschnitter J, Yibarbuk D, Ryan M, Campion O, Yunupingu B, Liddy M, Watts E (2008) Aboriginal land and sea management in the Top End: a community-driven evaluation. Darwin, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSkroblin A, Carboon T, Bidu G, Taylor M, Bidu N, Taylor W, Taylor K, Miller M, Robinson L, Williams C (2022) Developing a two-way learning monitoring program for Mankarr (Greater Bilby) in the Western Desert, Western Australia. Ecol Manage Restor 23:129\u0026ndash;138. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12543\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/emr.12543\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith W, Neale T, Weir JK (2021) Persuasion without policies: The work of reviving Indigenous peoples\u0026rsquo; fire management in southern Australia. Geoforum 120:82\u0026ndash;92. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.01.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.01.015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpencer R-J, Baxter GS (2006) Effects of fire on the structure and composition of open eucalypt forests. Austral Ecol 31(5):638\u0026ndash;646. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2006.01616.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.2006.01616.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStefano JD, York A, Swan M, Greenfield A, Coulson G (2009) Habitat Selection by the Swamp Wallaby (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;i\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;Wallabia Bicolor) in Relation to Diel Period, Food and Shelter. Austral Ecol 34(2):143\u0026ndash;155. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01890.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01890.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteffensen V (2020) Fire country: How Indigenous fire management could help save Australia. CSIRO Publishing\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTolhurst KG, Turvey ND (1992) Effects of bracken (Pteridium esculentum (Forst. f.) Cockayne) on eucalypt regeneration in west-central Victoria. For Ecol Manag 54(1\u0026ndash;4):45\u0026ndash;67. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(92)90004-S\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/0378-1127(92)90004-S\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTynan L, Cavanagh V (2021) Fire. AZ of Shadow Places Concepts, 1\u0026ndash;4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnderwood A (1994) On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecol Appl 4(1):3\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/1942110\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/1942110\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVigilante T, Bowman D (2004) Effects of individual fire events on the flower production of fruit-bearing tree species, with reference to Aboriginal people's management and use, at Kalumburu, North Kimberley, Australia. Aust J Bot 52(3):405\u0026ndash;416. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/BT03157\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/BT03157\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWatchorn DJ, Doherty TS, Wilson BA, Garkaklis MJ, Driscoll DA (2024) How do invasive predators and their native prey respond to prescribed fire? Ecol Evol 14(5):e11450. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11450\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ece3.11450\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeir JK (2023) Expert knowledge, collaborative concepts, and universal nature: naming the place of Indigenous knowledge within a public-sector cultural burning program. Ecol Soc 28(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13822-280117\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5751/ES-13822-280117\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilliamson B (2022) Cultural burning and public forests: convergences and divergences between Aboriginal groups and forest management in south-eastern Australia. 85(1):1\u0026ndash;5. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2022.2054134\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00049158.2022.2054134\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilliamson B, Weir J (2021) Indigenous peoples and natural hazard research, policy and practice in southern temperate Australia: an agenda for change. TheAustralian J Emerg Manage 36(4):62\u0026ndash;67. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.47389/36.4.62\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.47389/36.4.62\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXifr\u0026eacute;-Salvad\u0026oacute; M\u0026Agrave;, Prat-Guitart N, Francos M, Ubeda X, Castellnou M (2021) Effects of fire on the organic and chemical properties of soil in a Pinus halepensis Mill. Forest in Rocallaura. NE Spain Sustain 13(9):5178. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su13095178\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su13095178\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"urban-ecosystems","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ueco","sideBox":"Learn more about [Urban Ecosystems](https://www.springer.com/journal/11252)","snPcode":"11252","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11252/3","title":"Urban Ecosystems","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Indigenous fire management, gendered conservation, urban-bushland interface, First Nations conservation, biocultural conservation, two-eyed seeing","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIndigenous-led fire stewardship is increasingly recognised as important for ecological and cultural resilience; however, remains rare in urban landscapes due to regulatory barriers, fear and risk aversion. This study aligned with the first Dharug \u003cem\u003edhiyina\u003c/em\u003e (women\u0026rsquo;s)-led \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e (fire) since European invasion of \u003cem\u003eBidyiwung Badhu Nuru\u003c/em\u003e (Brown\u0026rsquo;s Waterhole) some 230 years ago, in what is now the urban Lane Cove National Park, Sydney. Using a collaborative cross-cultural monitoring approach, we evaluated ecological parameters before and after the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e and at three control sites: a modified BACI design. We assessed fuel loads, fire and soil properties, and culturally significant plants and mammals.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe low-intensity, patchy \u003cem\u003eguwiyan\u003c/em\u003eg had low flame height, slow rate of spread, and significantly reduced surface, near-surface and elevated fuel loads. Following the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e, we observed basal resprouting of the culturally significant medicinal plant \u003cem\u003eDybung/Mambara\u003c/em\u003e (Geebung, \u003cem\u003ePersoonia linearis\u003c/em\u003e). As desired by the Dharug women, dominant species, \u003cem\u003eDaynya\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eDodonaea triquetra\u003c/em\u003e) and \u003cem\u003eGurgi\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003ePteridium esculentum; Calochlaena dubia\u003c/em\u003e) significantly declined post-burn, with short-term regrowth. No significant change was detected in soil properties or activity of \u003cem\u003eBurraga\u003c/em\u003e (long-nosed bandicoot, \u003cem\u003ePerameles nasuta\u003c/em\u003e) or \u003cem\u003eBagarayi\u003c/em\u003e (swamp wallaby, \u003cem\u003eWallabia bicolor\u003c/em\u003e), indicating low \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e impact, consistent with the intent of the Dharug \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e for the dense urban woodland context.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study of a rare Indigenous-led cultural burn in an urban setting demonstrates the mechanics of a cross-cultural partnership that adopted a two-way science approach. We combined Indigenous values and Western science to provide evidence of reduced fuel loads and low ecological impact of the \u003cem\u003eguwiyang\u003c/em\u003e. Such studies can abate the fear surrounding fire in urban ecosystems, especially those managed by Indigenous custodians. With growing wildfire risks linked to climate change, cross-cultural collaborations offer valuable pathways for ecological and cultural resilience in urban areas.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Ecocultural monitoring reveals low impact of a Dharug dhiyina (women’s) guwiyang (fire) in an urban national park, Australia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-21 17:47:36","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7322178/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-08-25T03:09:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-08-25T00:50:29+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-08-15T21:02:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"208267742914395954294346963300125142944","date":"2025-08-15T17:31:02+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"119672911747276065171621382083953887645","date":"2025-08-14T21:31:20+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-08-13T02:35:28+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"145002578811698897617607019498054192526","date":"2025-08-12T00:40:47+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"326233844907873670217252677746563106934","date":"2025-08-11T22:13:07+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"192939314048229991147673753618769302924","date":"2025-08-11T17:21:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"161234649182215555012005512335199237967","date":"2025-08-11T11:32:24+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"108118360229466417404275721518198263153","date":"2025-08-10T22:33:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"246361615976435102235652817690042218772","date":"2025-08-09T21:20:46+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-09T13:08:23+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-08-08T00:12:36+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-08-07T23:42:58+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Urban Ecosystems","date":"2025-08-07T23:19:21+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"urban-ecosystems","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ueco","sideBox":"Learn more about [Urban Ecosystems](https://www.springer.com/journal/11252)","snPcode":"11252","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11252/3","title":"Urban Ecosystems","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1782a30a-ec22-4ff1-91ba-36f467add57f","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 21st, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-24T16:09:36+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-7322178","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01839-8","journal":{"identity":"urban-ecosystems","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Urban Ecosystems"},"publishedOn":"2025-11-18 15:58:44","publishedOnDateReadable":"November 18th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-21 17:47:36","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s11252-025-01839-8","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01839-8","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7322178","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7322178","identity":"rs-7322178","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}