Honours Thesis · Charles Sturt University · 2004
A survey of current Bush Fire Risk Management Plans developed by the NSW Rural Fire Service
An investigation into the effectiveness of mandatory Bush Fire Risk Management Plans across New South Wales in protecting Australia's irreplaceable cultural heritage assets — both indigenous and historic — from the ever-present threat of bushfire. Through systematic content analysis of 111 district plans, this research revealed a significant and systematic gap between planning requirements and practice.
Methodology
A systematic content analysis of the complete population of NSW plans.
The study analysed all available NSW Bush Fire Risk Management Plans (BFRMPs) — the legally mandated planning documents prepared by local Bush Fire Management Committees under the Rural Fires Act 1997 (NSW). Plans were subjected to both quantitative content analysis and qualitative assessment against a purpose-built benchmark framework.
All available NSW district Bush Fire Risk Management Plans were obtained and analysed — the complete population of plans in force at the time of study.
Each plan was coded for the presence and breadth of three environmental/ecological asset categories: historic heritage, places of Aboriginal significance, and threatened species.
A novel benchmark — the Ideal Heritage Disaster Plan — was constructed from best-practice literature, comprising 19 core elements across three sub-plans: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.
Where content was present, a threshold measure rated each element as low, medium, or high in detail — calibrated against the full plan population rather than an external ideal.
Key Findings
Four interconnected findings across plan composition, comprehensiveness, detail, and process.
Across all 111 plans, content within the environmental/ecological assets section was heavily skewed toward threatened species, with cultural heritage receiving a fraction of the attention despite carrying equal legal weight in the Model Plan.
Ideal ratio: 50% threatened species · 25% Aboriginal significance · 25% historic heritage. Average lines per plan: threatened species 53, Aboriginal significance 12.5, historic heritage 4.5.
When measured against the Ideal Heritage Disaster Plan's 19 core elements, the most striking finding was not inadequacy of detail — it was the complete absence of two of the three planning phases.
| Planning Phase | Core Elements Required | Status in Plans |
|---|---|---|
| Preparedness | Location, description, prevention, suppression techniques, risk analysis, prescribed drill, communication procedures (12 elements split by heritage type) | Partially present |
| Response | Rapid suppression techniques, heritage adviser role, stabilisation procedures, damage inventories | Entirely absent |
| Recovery | Detailed survey, current conservation plans, ongoing heritage adviser involvement | Entirely absent |
Within the preparedness phase, the two most actionable elements for firefighters — prescribed drills and communication procedures — were missing from every single plan examined.
| Core Element | Indigenous Heritage | Historic Heritage |
|---|---|---|
| Location | Present | Present |
| Description | Present | Present |
| Risk Analysis | Partial | Partial |
| Suppression Techniques | Selectively present (56 plans) | Rare (4 plans only) |
| Prevention | Near-absent | Near-absent |
| Prescribed Drill | Absent in all 111 | Absent in all 111 |
| Communication Procedures | Absent in all 111 | Absent in all 111 |
A notable driver of the disparity was the widespread uncritical adoption of a single matrix — Impact of fire types and suppression activities on Aboriginal sites (English, 2000) — present in 56 of 111 plans. No equivalent resource existed for historic heritage assets.
A parallel analysis examined why plans were so uniformly inadequate. The answer lay in a pervasive practice of copying content — from the Model Plan's own example text, from other plans, and from external sources — without adaptation to local conditions.
Four types of boilerplating identified: text copied from external sources; uncritical use of Model Plan example text; copying from other FMPs; and internal copying within the Model Plan itself.
The research concluded that disaster planning in NSW remained firmly within a command and control paradigm — privileging expert committees over local participatory knowledge, and discouraging committees from commissioning new data. With no heritage practitioners on any of the 142 Bush Fire Management Committees, locally specific cultural heritage knowledge had no formal pathway into the plans.
Recommendations
Four priority areas for improvement, applicable to NSW and comparable jurisdictions.
Integrate heritage practitioners into planning committeesNo designated heritage practitioners sat on either the Bush Fire Management Committees or the overarching Bush Fire Coordinating Committee. Direct inclusion of cultural heritage expertise in these bodies would address the majority of identified gaps at the source.
Establish a systematic quality review processPlans must be evaluated for quality, detail, and depth before finalisation — not merely checked for the presence of required headings. A peer-review or expert-audit mechanism is needed to replace the current reliance on self-assessment by volunteer committees.
Mandate Response and Recovery sub-plansThe complete absence of response and recovery planning for cultural heritage must be corrected through model plan revision. The Ideal Heritage Disaster Plan framework developed in this research provides a ready-made template of non-negotiable core elements for each phase.
Embed cultural heritage training in firefighter educationTraining programmes should cover identification of both indigenous and historic heritage assets, appropriate suppression techniques for different asset types, and preventative measures. Prescribed drills should be incorporated to test plan provisions before a real event.
Publications from this research
Peer-reviewed articles and reports arising from the Honours thesis, co-authored with supervisors Dirk H.R. Spennemann and Catherine Allan.