John O’Donnell

Over the last few years, there have been a lot of natural disasters in south eastern Australia as all are aware. It is opportune to review risk and mitigation management in regards to natural disasters in south eastern Australia and this article assesses both fire and flood risk and mitigation management.

Importance of adequate investment in disaster resilience and safer communities

The Australian Business Roundtable for Disaster Resilience and Safer Communities report “We cannot prevent weather events, but that does not make disasters inevitable” (November 2017) considered the total economic cost of natural disasters in each state and territory, finding that the forecast cost of natural disasters will reach $39 billion annually by 2050 noted the following:

“This report considers challenges for disaster resilience in the states and territories, and the role of each government in collaboration with other jurisdictions, community and business.

The report:

• Confirms that further investment in disaster resilience – in both physical and community preparedness – is essential to lessen the forecast increase in costs.
• Finds that investment in disaster resilience yields a double dividend. First, in the avoided impacts of disasters when they occur. And second, in the broader co-benefits that arise even in the absence of a disaster.
• Shows that state and territory governments have several levels to directly build resilience.”

Deloitte Access Economics report “Economic reality check Adapting Australia for climate-resilient growth” from January 2022 notes:

“Australia’s disaster relief strategies are underpinned by a cycle of underinvestment in resilience and adaptation. It’s been estimated by the Productivity Commission that 97 per cent of all-natural disaster funding in Australia is spent after an event, with just 3 per cent invested prior to an event to reduce the impact of future disasters.”

The investment of just 3 per cent of all-natural disaster funding in Australia prior to disaster events to reduce the impact of future disasters is staggering. And considering that investment in disaster resilience yields a double dividend, avoided impacts of disasters when they occur and also the broader co-benefits that arise even in the absence of a disaster, major and increased investment in flood mitigation is essential.

The importance of adequate investment in fire and flood risk reduction and mitigation is discussed further below.

Fire/ bushfire risk and mitigation

There have been a very large number of bushfires in Australia’s history. In relation to the disastrous 2019/20 bushfire season, as noted in the paper Filkov et al. (2020):

• … A total of 18,983,588 hectares were burned, 3,113 houses and 33 lives lost in 15,344 bushfires in Black Summer fires; and
• Damage from the bushfires is estimated to have had a $20 billion impact to the economy, greatly exceeding the record A$4.4 billion set by 2009 Black Saturday fires.

Most of these bushfire areas were located in south eastern Australia.

There are many important risk and mitigation issues in relation to fire and bushfire management in south eastern Australia:

• There is a poor consideration of the fuel load issue across forests and actual forest fuel loads in forests, at very high levels, strata and heights and increasing. There is inadequate action addressing the fuel load issue and reducing community, infrastructure and fauna impacts from bushfires.
• There is totally inadequate funding, focus and commitment for reducing fuel loads, undertaking prescribed burning, forest thinning and community protection. There is inadequate state funding for prescribed burning and minor federal funding to increase prescribed burning, noting areas of prescribed burning are very small and decreasing and communities are at risk.
• There have been losses of bushfire skills over the last 30 years. This applies with bushfire control, backburning, prescribed burning and in some cases the use of aircraft in prescribed burning.
• Many communities have limited fire mitigation with inadequate bushfire protection.
• There is little active community involvement in fire management across Australia, only in a small number of cases. The bushfire impacts on towns and cities across Australia has been large over long period. Major investment in avenues such as the fire adapted communities, firewise, local fire safe councils is important to increase community safety.
• In a number of local government areas there has been limited funding and in some cases will to resolve fire issues and mitigation.
• Risks at each location vary and solutions will vary depending on extent of the bushfire problem, extent of impacts, funding, extent of mitigation opportunities and community input to solutions.
• Improved bushfire protection opportunities and approaches to protect communities need to be tabled for each town and city and discussed with each community and then at state and federal levels.
• Focus on low intensity burning for protection of towns and cities at the expense of landscapes is increasing the bushfire problem with long run fires across landscapes.
• Bushfire insurance costs are going up.
• Infrastructure protection from bushfires is a sleeping disaster area.
• There is limited funding and actioning for improving resilience in Australia’s forests and protecting communities. There is generally very poor actioning in regards to forest health and the decline of forest health across Australia’s forests, mild fire is an important component of improving forest health and setting up healthy and landscapes.

In relation to bushfire risk, it is good to assess individual Local Bush Fire Risk Management Plans on the web for those areas in NSW where the 2019/20 bushfires occurred and check the fire risk ratings applied to the towns and cities impacted by those bushfires. In the opinion of the author, in many cases the risk assessments were inadequate. There was inadequate consideration of actual fuel loads, fuel strata, landscape fires, firebrand/ ember risks, low intensity burning programs across landscapes for each town and city and specific fire issues for towns and cities. It is easy for individuals to access their Local Bush Fire Risk Management Plan on the web and assess risk assessments.

There are many barriers and restrictions to the use of low intensity prescribed and ecological maintenance burning in south eastern Australia, further increasing bushfire risks to communities and the same ecosystems where low intensity fire is restricted. Barriers occur within the following category areas, including funding: community and infrastructure; risk management; expertise; advice source; bureaucracy and leadership and on the ground barrier issues in need of resolution. It is important to consider barriers in optimising low intensity burning programs in south eastern Australia in order to optimise fire management.

One state leads the way in regards to undertaking low intensity burning of forested areas. As outlined in The Truth About Fuel Reduction Burning on the Bush Fire Front website, the graph below is the result, not of junk science modelling, but of real data gathered from almost 60 years of historical data from the forests of south west WA. These data unequivocally show that when the area of prescribed burning trends down, the area of uncontrolled bushfires (wildfires) trends up. There is a simple explanation: bushfires are more difficult to put out in long unburnt, heavy fuels. The area annually burnt by bushfire escalates exponentially when the area of prescribed burning in a region falls below 8 percent per annum. Burning about 8% per annum results in about 40 % of bushland carrying fuels 0 to 5 years old.

Meanwhile, back in south eastern Australia in NSW, prescribed burning was more extensive before 2000, with much more effective fire authority and active local government involvement and then Forestry Commission support in NSW. But it was never at adequate levels around the 8 % of forested area burnt annually over long periods. Over more recent times in NSW, annual areas of prescribed burning have ranged between 1-2 % of forested areas, never adequate for protection of communities and landscapes from major bushfires.

In regards to the current bushfire suppression focus in Australia and USA, important information includes:

• Adams et al (2020) “Causes and consequences of Eastern Australia’s 2019–20 season of mega-fires: A broader perspective” (First published: 16 April 2020):
  “Mega-fires were the subject of an international conference held in Tallahassee, Florida in 2011, spawned by increasing awareness that fire suppression was “running out of road.” Jerry Williams, the former National Director of Fire & Aviation Management, United States Forest Service, was the keynote speaker and wrote: “protecting people and sustaining natural resources can no longer rely on suppression capabilities, alone; protection will become more dependent on how we manage the forests where high-impact mega-fires incubate” (Williams, 2013) … More recently, an international group of authors emphasized that an ever-increasing focus by governments on fire suppression was a trap, as it allowed fuels to accumulate to levels that would eventually burn at intensities well beyond the capabilities of any fire fighting service, anywhere (Moriera et al., 2020). Sadly, these predictions have proved correct in Australia.”

• “There has also been a sharp increase in the suppression costs, which have been about a billion dollars per year, and hence more focus is needed in reducing the suppression costs by expanding the use of mitigation strategies such as prescribed burning”: “Exploratory Data Analysis of Wildfires in USA” by Arpit Rana June 2019.

• As noted in Science News, “Reducing wildfire risks for better management and resource allocation” (December 10, 2019) Society for Risk Analysis: “Difficult to contain, wildfires consume everything in their path and wreak havoc on human and animal lives, homes and landscapes. From 1995 to 2015, wildfire management has cost the U.S. $21 billion … Management resources are becoming strained and funds that were earmarked for promoting forest health and fuel reduction are being diverted to fire response activities.”
• As noted in Burrows (2018) “Conflicting Evidence Prescribed Burning: When ‘Evidence’ Is Not the Reality”, prescribed burning greatly assists fire suppression and synergises community preparedness.

Flood risk and mitigation

There have been a large number of floods affecting Australian communities over history and the last few years. This section focusses on flood risk and mitigation for the towns and small cities across south eastern Australia, many of which have been badly neglected over a lot of years. This article doesn’t consider mega flood mitigation approaches such as is being considered at Warragamba.

There are many important risk and mitigation issues in relation to flooding:

• Many communities have limited flood mitigation with inadequate protection.
• Other communities have sound flood mitigation, however it is at its maximum limit.
• In many cases there has been limited funding and in some cases will to resolve flooding issues and flood mitigation. Preparation of shovel ready projects is an issue that needs massive community and government input across states.
• Costs of flooding is huge and increasing.
• Flood insurance costs are going up.
• The Insurance Council of Australia is calling on state and federal governments to commit to spending $2 billion over the next five years on infrastructure to make communities more resilient to floods.
• Risks at each location vary and solutions will vary depending on extent of the flood problem, extent of impacts, funding, extent of mitigation opportunities and community input to solutions.
• Options to protect communities need to be tabled for each town and city and discussed with each community and then at state and federal levels.
• As a society we need to be careful where mitigation of flood risks occurs at one location and then downstream increased development of floodplains doesn’t increase overall flood risks further.

Disaster flooding areas like Lismore, Ballina and many other communities in south eastern Australia need updated mitigation measures and recovery funding urgently, with a massive focus on design and build of flood mitigation measures to minimise risk of future flooding in those areas. Shovel ready projects need to be progressed urgently. Where there are potential options available, the social and environmental costs of ongoing repeat flooding is not an acceptable option and agreed solutions need to be actioned.

Grafton and South Grafton is an example of an extensive flood levee, gate and pump system, it has been successful over time. However, noting the number of close shaves in regards to flooding, further adaptive management is urgently needed for Grafton, South Grafton and other nearby towns to reduce flood risk further, developing shovel ready projects urgently for funding. There are many locations such as this.

Has fire and flood risk and mitigation management gone astray in south eastern Australia?

In the authors opinion, it certainly has in regards to both fire management and flood mitigation based on the information above, extent of fire and flood mitigation and other information. In the past many state governments and local governments were better organised in regards to fire and flood mitigation, at least better than what is happening today in many locations. However, some funding is available and shovel ready/ activity ready projects need to be in place for funding. As noted above by Deloitte Access Economics, Australia’s disaster relief strategies are underpinned by a cycle of underinvestment in resilience and adaptation.

Actions that can be undertaken to increase fire and flood mitigation and reduce fire and flood risks in south eastern Australia

There are many actions that can be undertaken to increase fire and flood mitigation and reduce fire and flood risks in south eastern Australia, including:

1. to adopt a greatly increased focus on fire mitigation across states and the undertake a detailed review of the barriers and rules restricting low intensity burning and aim to achieve a minimum of 8% low intensity burning of forested areas annually across landscapes. This will save the government, businesses and communities a large amount of money in reduced bushfire impacts and costs.
2. to undertake major bushfire investment in avenues such as the fire adapted communities, firewise, local fire safe councils, would be beneficial.
3. to adopt a major focus on increased flood mitigation works across states, with state and federal governments working actively with local governments and getting shovel ready projects for funding and installation. There is some funding available from Infrastructure Australia and in some states for flood mitigation projects. The Insurance Council of Australia is calling on state and federal governments to commit to spending $2 billion over the next five years on infrastructure to make communities more resilient to floods. It may be time to reduce state and federal funding of rail and road projects to catch up with urgent flood mitigation needs.
4. to work closely with the Insurance Council of Australia to increase fire and flood mitigation and reduce insurance risks and costs to communities.
5. to review the 3 per cent all-natural disaster funding in Australia invested prior to an event/ 97 per cent of spend after an event, focussing where post disaster savings in disaster savings can be made by judicious fire and flood mitigation installation. And considering that investment in disaster resilience yields a double dividend, avoided impacts of disasters when they occur and also the broader co-benefits that arise even in the absence of a disaster, major and increased investment in flood mitigation is essential.
6. for each affected local government area and each town/ city in that LGA prepare an initial set of fire and flood mitigation proposals, with guidance and assistance from the states and progressive funding of optimum solutions.
7. to review federal and state policies and actioning for fire and flood mitigation, including at election time.
8. to urgently complete a totally independent review of both fire and flood risk assessment approaches across individual states by on the ground experienced fire and flood personnel and preferably from another state.
9. to move the focus away from centralised fire, flooding and resilience control to greater regional/ local control, with the state and federal governments focussed on optimising assistance in funding mitigation and disasters where they occur.
10. for key departments such as the Auditor Generals to undertake set 2-3 yearly reviews of mitigation, management of disaster events and recovery for fire, flood and resilience management across each south eastern Australian state, assessing each local government area.

About John O’Donnell

John is a retired district forester and environmental manager for hydro-electric construction and road construction projects.   His main interests are mild maintenance burning of forests, trying to change the culture of massive fuel loads in our forests setting up large bushfires, establishing healthy and safe landscapes, fire fighter safety, as well as town and city bushfire safety.