Back burning

[oz fire]

I have followed with some interest the recent fires in New South Wales (having attended there a few times to help) and noticed their exceptional use of backburning to contain fires.

It raises the question why we don't do more of it?

Speaking to someone from NSWRFS the other week (following the first Xmas fires) they stated that they are proactive with backburning as it reduces the risks to fire fighters and appliances when entering difficult terrain. They stated that in their planning they choose appropriate roads, tracks, land marks etc and decide that they will hold the fire there by putting in back burns (except where homes/buildings are between the fire and back burn). They said that this allowed crews to put in control lines along the flanks of fires and prevent their spread and reduced the risk of burn overs, fire fighter injury and appliance problems.

It was a long discussion but had sound logic - that I think could easily be applied to the majority of rural fires here???

OK maybe we burn a little more, but in the long run it must be safer for all concerned and also allow us to have excellent containment areas that we manage, rather than the fire burning out to us 

[fire03rescue]

yes back burning is a good idea, but in NSW a lot of the fires they have go for 3 plus days and the area they have fires is very different to us. Most of our fires are quick and only for a day, note I said MOST.
The Black Tueday fires were quick and most of the next few days after the fire was mopping up.

[strikeathird]

When I went to KI last year for 3 days, all we did was backburning.

You have to remember, sometimes the conditions don't suit backburning, sometimes the terrain doesn't suit backburning, and sometimes you just dont have the appliance / crew numbers to SAFELY conduct a burn....

NSW has very different terrain, and different fires than we do.... Every fire is different, and every fire has a different way it can be fought...

[rescue5271]

backburning has its place all the conditions have to be right,as we have seen in NSW over the past day or so backburns dont often work rather they turn a small fire into a large one and so I for one would have to question the last two burns that nsw did to stop a fire as they both failed......

[Firefrog]

I have also seen poorly planned and poorly executed burns. The only time I have ever considered putting in a burn is with the planning and blessing of a good incident management team.

You can undo too much hard work if you make even a small error doing a burn.

Having said that - a well planned and well executed burning operation can prove very successful. Burns must be conducted with forethought and good judgement not by a lone officer and a drip torch. I once saw this happen in NSW with obvious results.

[rescue5271]

I have some 1994 newsfootage that I got from one of the TV stations,a rfs crew and tanker rock up one guy takes off with the drip torch and sets the scrub alight....Then panick as the crew does not know where he is and the fact that they had done it in the wrong spot........Bad PR on TV if you ask me...

[oz fire]

Thanks for your thoughts!

I have re watched some recent SA footage (Adelaide Hills fires, Murray Bridge fire and some rural fires that made Adelaide news) and in most I have seen appliances trying their hardest to work the fires edge, in many instances only several truck lengths apart. In most of the footage they have been within 100 - 200 mtrs from a road and I again question do we need to subject ourselves to the extremes when we could possible pull back to a safer area and consider the alternatives - back burning is one, letting the fire come out another.

Having several times on small fires in the Adelaide Hills experimented with letting the fire come to us or burning around the fire I have found at the end of the day, we have reduced the risk - we have eliminated all the fuel from the site and allowed the crews to have the upper hand, mind you on each occasion the weather has been in our favour - just food for thought