Bushfire season 2019-2020

[mikethepike]

I've been following this thread for a while now and my initial feeling was frustration at some comments that I didn't think were in accordance with the facts. Certainly it reminded me of three pieces of advice I was given by my leader and mentor when starting out in Government employment in an extension-advisory role in agriculture. One was to be very careful about making blanket/one-size-fits-all type statements because there will always be exceptions. The second was to include words like usually, probably etc to allow for the exceptions, some you possibly never considered. The third was to never use the word 'simple' because there is nothing simple about understanding and dealing with biological systems. I was never advised to be sure of the facts before opening my mouth or taking up the pen. That was taken as a given!

Just on the current bushfire situation, I recall someone posting here a statement to the effect that whatever happens with the fire, nature will run its course. Yes it will but I believe that it won't go back to where it started pre-fires because the former temporal longer term equilibrium is almost certainly lost. This is because the former biodiversity of affected areas will likely get nowhere near its former abundance and species mix before there is another severe fire. And so on. The former apparent sustainability seems lost and I grieve to think this.

[potato]

Don't worry about facts, just forget the detail in your messaging:

https://blog.csiro.au/explain-current-b ... vironment/

I wonder if this was the briefing they provided to the PM.

[Moondog55]

mikethepike You are probably right.
However the statements and feelings of anger about decades of mismanagement and neglect are probably a true indication of what many of us feel is the real truth.

[Son of a Beach]

According to the ABC, the NSW RFS commissioner says that:

Hazard reduction burns that are only two years old, we're seeing these fires on these bad days just skip straight through it... We're only seeing effective amelioration on fire spread through hazard reduction areas that have been done so in the last 12 months.

RFS Commissioner says hazard-reduction burns made his organisation 'public enemy number one'

[Zapruda]

Some photos of the KNP huts

[LachlanB]

Thanks for the detailed hut update Zapruda. Any word on Cotterills Cottage at the Yagby River campground?

[Zapruda]

Apparently most of Yarrangobilly was saved. I’m not sure about Cotterills though. Fingers crossed.

Edit - apparently it’s fine!

[GBW]

Thanks Zapruda. It's sad to see these huts gone and I feel very fortunate to have visited them once. Brooks looks a little out of shape but still standing. I remember walking out there from Happys saying how beautiful that area was and camping outside on the grass. Looks like a mess now. I read somewhere Round Mtn Hut and Bradley Obriens copped it too.

[Lophophaps]

Zapruda, thanks for the images. At least some huts are standing, very close to not being so. Two weeks ago I camped at Happys and Boobee Huts. I walked past Mackays Hut. KHA will probably be in need of trauma support. Fifteen years of building gone in just a few weeks of climate change denial fires. In happier times.

Happys Hut

Happys.png (484.43 KiB) Viewed 21730 times

[Mark F]

So sad. Trying to put a very small positive spin on the Arsenic Ridge project that has been discussed here and privately, once access is restored to the area it would be a perfect time to scout out any traces of the old bridal trail and allow Brooks Hut to step into the place of Happys Hut especially for aawt walkers.

[Zapruda]

So sad. Trying to put a very small positive spin on the Arsenic Ridge project that has been discussed here and privately, once access is restored to the area it would be a perfect time to scout out any traces of the old bridal trail and allow Brooks Hut to step into the place of Happys Hut especially for aawt walkers.

We did the work of finding and taping out the old track in early December over 4 days with the permission of NPWS. We did it all the way from Tabletop saddle to Brooks.

I like your thinking. Finding the old track in the burn was briefly discussed yesterday. I am interested to see how far off we were if any of the old track is visible.

If any positives can come out of this situation one of them will be the rediscovery of old tracks and European and Indigenous sites.

[Hallu]

This is because the former biodiversity of affected areas will likely get nowhere near its former abundance and species mix before there is another severe fire.

Yes that's the issue. Bushfires aren't a problem for Australian forests, it's their increased frequency due to climate change that's been the issue. Most eucalypts are built to handle two/three fires per century, not 5 or 6 like it can be now. Not to mention some eucalypts simply don't grow back after a fire, like the mountain ash/swamp gum, which is the main species in several large forest of South East Australia and Tasmania.

I was really sad to learn that Croajingolong was so severely damaged, it was one of my favorite areas in Victoria. A prime location to see large monitors and ground parrots.

[peregrinator]

Further information dated 8 Jan on Kosciuszko Hut Surveillance here:

https://snowymagazine.com.au/2020/01/08 ... veillance/

Thanks to GBW for providing an earlier link to the excellent Snowy Magazine.

[ghosta]

NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons via ABC wrote:
Hazard reduction burns that are only two years old, we're seeing these fires on these bad days just skip straight through it... We're only seeing effective amelioration on fire spread through hazard reduction areas that have been done so in the last 12 months.

This will be wideley used a evidence it is no use conducting hazard reduction burns im sure. In a more normal fire situation fuel reduction has proven time after time to be very effective. The public will believe that more normal fire behavior will not ever happen again and every fire will burn like these fire did on blow up days.

There was an excellent suggestion that bodies much like Landcare be set up and funded whete local bodies plan and tailor fuel reduction burning.This gets the programme out of the hands of bureaucrats and into the hands of practical people. We have enough of highly qulalified people with no practival experience and a ladder climbing desire making excuses from their offices why less and less burning can be done.

[Lophophaps]

An interesting international perspective.
https://independentaustralia.net/busine ... isis,13475

[peregrinator]

An article from the Snowy Magazine today:

https://snowymagazine.com.au/2020/01/10/kosciuszko-huts-and-heritage/

[slparker]

NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons via ABC wrote:
Hazard reduction burns that are only two years old, we're seeing these fires on these bad days just skip straight through it... We're only seeing effective amelioration on fire spread through hazard reduction areas that have been done so in the last 12 months.

This will be wideley used a evidence it is no use conducting hazard reduction burns im sure. In a more normal fire situation fuel reduction has proven time after time to be very effective. The public will believe that more normal fire behavior will not ever happen again and every fire will burn like these fire did on blow up days.

There was an excellent suggestion that bodies much like Landcare be set up and funded whete local bodies plan and tailor fuel reduction burning.This gets the programme out of the hands of bureaucrats and into the hands of practical people. We have enough of highly qulalified people with no practival experience and a ladder climbing desire making excuses from their offices why less and less burning can be done.

Hazard reduction burning is not effective in conditions of sustained drought (i.e. low moisture) and high temperature. Unless that fuel reduction is done 12 within a year of the predicted fire conditions. this is what the NSW RFS Commissioner, and the research, agrees upon.

hazard reduction burning to the extent required to prevent fires in these conditions is not possible to achieve - there is not enough manpower, equipment and money to reduce the hazard and there are associated problems with concentrated sustained burning in one 12 month period- it kills more vulnerable people (with heart and respiratory conditions) than it saves with preventing burnt people.

Therefore, hazard reduction burning is not a feasible prevention strategy for fire conditions following a sustained drought - i.e. the extreme conditions encountered in 2019.

hazard reduction burning is part of a sustained strategy in cooler, damper conditions or where there is proximity to property. Unfortunately cooler, damper conditions will become less common as global warming, and Australian drying, increases.

it won't matter whether the responsibility for management is in the hands of bureacrats or 'practical people' extensive hazard reduction is not an evidence based approach for bushfire prevention in extreme conditions.

I would dearly love to be wrong but I am not sure that wishing the facts and the expert opinion away will work

[crollsurf]

Todays KNP fire prediction is looking as bad as it could get. Up to 10mm of rain predicted in a weeks time but the whole park could be burnt out by then.
https://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0010/161110/Highlands-Potential-fire-spread-prediction-incl-embers-A0.png

[jrg]

Some photos of the KNP huts

So sad... Sawyers Hill (the one next to the SM Highway) was destroyed too (after being rebuilt post-2003!)

[rcaffin]

Inescapable fact: the bush is going to burn more often. It does not matter the source: lightning, teenagers, farmers, cigarettes or what ever.
Acceptance of climate change and increased fire risk as a result is not within the mindset of the Liberal Party, so forget them.

There IS a role for control burning imho: not whole scale burning right across the bush to stop bushfires, but in clearing defensive barriers immediately around building: houses, barns, sheds, factories etc. The purpose id NOT to try to stop the fire: you can't. It is to avoid having the property destroyed. And this change needs to be backed up with both legislation and commercial (insurance) measures. You don't clear: it's entirely YOUR problem when you get burnt out. Probably need to also get legislation governing what sort of buildings you can have. Timber frames with timber cladding: forget it. Brick and steel: yes.

My 2c.

Cheers
Roger

[Moondog55]

If you mean with new buildings that is pretty much covered with the BZ rating and if you want to live in the bush then the cost of that BZ rating will need to be factored in.
I don't think any of the house lost so far will have enough insurance cover to rebuild with a BZ rating. I have always been heavily in favour of controlled burns as a means of reducing bushfire intensity but I can see that they have nil effect in catastrophic fires such as these.
I can also see that the minimum firefighting capacity in peoples reserve tanks will need to be increased 10 fold, obviously 2000 litres has little effect on such massive flame fronts. More swimming pools and larger dams perhaps with those associated costs too.
This coupled with better landscape design, we know how to do it but I guess it wasn't cost effective in the past

[rcaffin]

A feature of the big fires - the dangerous ones, is that they move FAST. Very often they crown. Swimming pools won't be of much use: flash boiling! A little fire - a tanker can usually handle that.

What does work is good building construction, a good big clear firebreak to the W or NW, and someone there to pop out after the front has passed to mop up. What you want (so to speak) is for the fire front to go over the top of you, quickly, and pass on.

Sue & I spend time every day removing all the ground fuel - sticks etc, from the W and NW directions. If you don't want to do the work, don't live in the bush.

In the meantime, I must read up on the new BZ rating. And good URLs?

Cheers
Roger

[Moondog55]

??
Very new to me so I don't have many bookmarks yet Roger
https://www.envirotecture.com.au/wp-con ... design.pdf
https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy- ... rone-areas
A lot of talk on the Renovate forum now about BZ rated windows and shutters. Windows and doors being the weakest point in most buildings. DIY will not now suffice for fire shutters so the old corrugated steel drop downs are not going to cut it and it seems that bronze fly wire isn't sufficient for it either

[rcaffin]

Yeah, windows are a weak point. We fitted proper bushfire-rated roller shutters/doors to the outside of all doors and windows on the N & W sides.
A side benefit is that on the stinking hot days, closing these rollers stops the intense IR coming from outside. We had not really planned that, but it is obvious in hindsight.

Cheers
Roger

[Moondog55]

Swimming pools won't be of much use:
What does work is good building construction, a good big clear firebreak to the W or NW, and someone there to pop out after the front has passed to mop up. What you want (so to speak) is for the fire front to go over the top of you, quickly, and pass on.

Cheers
Roger

The swimming pool gets put on the fire side as part of the planning so it adds to the size of the firebreak as well as adding 20 to 55kilolitres of water to the deluge supply, then the dam below that because most fires go faster uphill than downhill the fire side may be on the downhill side not always the North or NW.
Maybe if we want to live in the bush we need to start thinking of small enclaves and sharing these resources

[rcaffin]

Not a bad idea, except that you then have all the hassles of maintaining the pool. If we want to swim, we use the much larger dam. In the abstract, an idea.

In our case the land to the west of the house has 100 - 200 mm of soil, then it is solid Hawksbury sandstone. Not viable for us. No matter.

Enclaves: no thank you. Our house is some distance from all the roads and neighbours, and we want it that way. Anti-social, that's us. But then, if you knew some of the neighbours we have had ... Loud music and cars, not one but two killers, one of which did do jail time but the other escaped (pub brawl). Both have left the district.

Cheers
Roger

[ofuros]

Just a few thoughts for those living in our Aussie bush...

Perhaps a sprinkler system built into the house roof using a oversized tank water system will protect the house from the initial raging fire front, firies have the option to use a fine spray pattern to protect themselves from the radiated heat while the other fireman hoses...may need a stand alone water pump though in case of no power. Tested routinely.

Probably some sort of underground bunker too if you plan to protect your home or get cut off & can't get out in time....incase your engulfed by the gates of hell itself.

I haven't looked into the details of those ideas but I'd be thinking along those lines...for next time.

[neilmny]

..Perhaps a sprinkler system built into the house roof using a oversized tank water system will protect the house from the initial raging fire front...........

We are on the very edge of the bushfire prone zone and this is something I've thought about myself and would probably need to be gravity fed to be reliable.
The were reports in 2009 of vapourising fuel in motor driven pumps or generators and the failure of the power supply network causing home fire fighting systems to fail.

[Moondog55]

Firefighting pumps need to be diesel for this reason and the problem with gravity systems is the huge strength of the towers needed if they are going to be fire resistant when holding up the mass of water needed for a deluge system, such strong fire resistant structures are very expensive, but it's possible that the base of them could be made fireproof and act as a refuge of last resort and a place to keep all the firefighting clothing and associated gear. Much talk about the need for 20 minutes of supplementary O2 for each person in severe cases and I assume such severe cases are going to become more frequent. You have to think in terms of being able to survive a small nuclear bomb for an extended period of time.

[Warin]

Perhaps a sprinkler system built into the house roof using a oversized tank water system will protect the house from the initial raging fire front,

Problems with sprinkler systems;

Wind blows it away exposing some portion of the house.

Pump can catch fire, run out of fuel, fail to start...

Fire service can come and take the water to fight a fire elsewhere before this fire threatens.


There are those that have done this. At least one of them is off grid and has battery backup with enough capacity to power an electric pump. There are minimum water storage requirements for rural properties (varies by state, property size and availability of town water).. does not stop the fireies taking the water to fight fires elsewhere. If you have a dam then choppers can take the water from it .. in a state of emergency they don't need your permission.

Better than nothing. But getting ember attack under control by other means is more reliable. In terms of the flame front.. don't think you will have enough water flow rate ... > 40kW per square meter boils water off at a fair rate. Your domestic kettle is ~ 2KW... There are building materials and methods that will withstand flames for >30 minutes, more expensive that the sprinkler system but also more reliable.