An exploration of residents’ intended wildfire evacuation responses in Mt. Lorne, Yukon, Canada

Abstract

Wildfire evacuations disrupt people’s lives, create an additional hazard for emergency responders and residents, and are expensive to execute. Alternatives to evacuation are used in Australia and a few jurisdictions in the United States. Numerous studies have examined the “stay and defend” option during a wildfire in Australia, and evacuation alternatives have also been examined in the US. However, evacuation alternatives have not yet received scholarly attention in Canada. This study focused on the community of Mt. Lorne, Yukon, and explored residents’ perceptions of alternatives to evacuation due to wildfires, their evacuation intentions, and factors that influenced their intentions. Focus group participants planned to stay on their property despite a wildfire evacuation order because of the perceived safety of their property, and concerns about evacuating including leaving their property unprotected, losing harvested meat or other food stocks due to spoiling, and not knowing what to do with sled dog teams or livestock. However, some of these residents lacked the knowledge about how to stay on their property safely.