@article {bnh-7475, title = {Exploring the key drivers of forest flammability in wet eucalypt forests using expert-derived conceptual models}, journal = {Landscape Ecology}, volume = {35}, year = {2020}, month = {06/2020}, pages = {1775{\textendash}1798}, abstract = {

Context

Fire behaviour research has largely focused on dry ecosystems that burn frequently, with far less attention on wetter forests. Yet, the impacts of fire in wet forests can be high and therefore understanding the drivers of fire in these\ systems\ is vital.

Objectives

We sought to identify and rank by importance the factors plausibly driving flammability in wet eucalypt forests, and describe relationships between them. In doing so, we formulated a set of research priorities.

Methods

Conceptual models of forest flammability in wet eucalypt forests were elicited from 21 fire experts using a combination of elicitation techniques. Forest flammability was defined using fire occurrence and fireline intensity as measures of ignitability and heat release rate, respectively.

Results

There were shared and divergent opinions about the drivers of flammability in wet eucalypt forests. Widely agreed factors were drought, dead fine fuel moisture content, weather and topography. These factors all influence the availability of biomass to burn, albeit their effects and interactions on various dimensions of flammability are poorly understood. Differences between the models related to lesser understood factors (e.g. live and coarse fuel moisture, plant traits, heatwaves) and the links between factors.

Conclusions

By documenting alternative conceptual models, we made shared and divergent opinions explicit about flammability in wet forests. We identified four priority research areas: (1) quantifying drought and fuel moisture thresholds for fire occurrence and intensity, (2) modelling microclimate in dense vegetation and rugged terrain, (3) determining the attributes of live vegetation that influence forest flammability, (4) evaluating fire management strategies.

}, keywords = {Cognitive mapping, Conceptual models, Expert elicitation, Fire behaviour, fire intensity, flammability, Structured decision-making, Structured expert judgement, Wet forest, Wildfire}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01055-z}, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-020-01055-z}, author = {Jane Cawson and Victoria Hemming and Ackland, A and Wendy R. Anderson and David Bowman and Ross Bradstock and Brown, T and Jamie Burton and Geoffrey J. Cary and Thomas Duff and Alex Filkov and Furlaud, James M. and Tim Gazzard and Kilinc, Musa and Petter Nyman and Ross Peacock and Mike Ryan and Jason J. Sharples and Gary J. Sheridan and Tolhurst, K.G. and Tim Wells and Phil Zylstra and Trent Penman} } @article {BF-3183, title = {The relationship between fire behaviour measures and community loss: an exploratory analysis for developing a bushfire severity scale}, journal = {Natural Hazards}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Current fire danger scales do not adequately reflect the potential destructive force of a bushfire in Australia and, therefore, do not provide fire prone communities with an adequate warning for the potential loss of human life and property. To determine options for developing a bushfire severity scale based on community impact and whether a link exists between the energy release rate (power) of a fire and community loss, this paper reviewed observations of 79 wildfires (from 1939 to 2009) across Victoria and other southern states of Australia. A methodology for estimating fire power based on fuel loading, fire size and progression rate is presented. McArthur{\textquoteright}s existing fire danger indices (FDIs) as well as fuel- and slope-adjusted FDIs were calculated using fire weather data. Analysis of possible relationships between fire power, FDIs, rate of spread and Byram{\textquoteright}s fireline intensity and community loss was performed using exposure as a covariate. Preliminary results showed that a stronger relationship exists between community loss and the power of the fire than between loss and FDI, although fuel-adjusted FDI was also a good predictor of loss. The database developed for this study and the relationships established are essential for undertaking future studies that require observations of past fire behaviour and losses and also to form the basis of developing a new severity scale}, issn = {0921-030X}, doi = {10.1007/s11069-012-0156-y}, author = {Sarah Harris and Wendy R. Anderson and Kilinc, Musa and Fogarty, Liam} }