Assessment Task 2 Template: Fuel hazard and slope assessment
Surface fuel photo
Near-surface fuel photo
Bark fuel photo
Elevated fuel photo
Overall vegetation structure
1. Estimate the surface fuel hazard using the hazard score method outlined in the Module
activity. Complete the table provided with the depth, percent cover, horizontal connectivity
and hazard score of the surface fuels.
Depth (cm)
% cover
Horizontal connectivity
Surface fuel hazard rating
5
98
Complete. Almost no gaps between fuel
Extreme
2. Estimate the near-surface hazard using the hazard-score method outlined in the Module
activity. Complete the table provided with percent dead material, percent cover, horizontal
connectivity and hazard score of the near-surface layer.
% dead material
% cover
Horizontal connectivity
Near surface fuel hazard rating
10
20
Gaps many time the size of fuel patches
Moderate
3. Estimate the elevated fuel hazard using the hazard-score method detailed in the Module
activity. Complete the table provided with the percent cover, percent dead, vertical
continuity, vegetation density and hazard score of the bark layer.
% cover
% dead
Vertical continuity
Vegetation density
Elevate fuel hazard rating
20
5
Hardly any
Easy to walk through.
Moderate
4. Estimate the bark fuel hazard using the simplified hazard-score method detailed in the
Module activity. Complete the table provided with the bark type and hazard score of the
bark layer.
Bark type
Bark hazard rating
Smooth and free from loose bark
Low
5. Estimate the overall fuel hazard score using the tables overleaf.
Surface + Near Surface: Extreme + Moderate = Extreme
Bark + Elevated + Combined Surface: Low + Moderate + Extreme = High
Write your answer here: High
Tables from Hines et al. (2011)
9.
Fuel hazard type
Your rating
Surface fuel hazard
Extreme
Near surface fuel
hazard
Elevated fuel
hazard
Bark fuel hazard
Moderate
Occasionally increases flame height.
Moderate
Does not sustain flame readily.
Low
No bark present that can contribute to fire behaviour.
Your rating
Effect on the likely success of first attack at FFDI 25
(see table on p. 36)
High
Between 95% and 50%
Overall fuel hazard
score
Effect on fire behaviour at FFDI 25 (see tables for
each fuel hazard type)
Surface fires spread easily. Increasing flame depth
and residence time.
10.
Method used
Stake, string and bubble
Rise
87mm
Run
1000mm (10m)
Slope
1038mm (10.4m) (5 degrees)
House position relative to vegetation
(upslope/downslope/flat)
upslope
11.
i. Three of your six fuel hazard ratings and implication on fire behaviour:
Surface: The surface fuel is composed of fine fuels such a dry leaves, twigs and bark. It contributes to
the rate of spread and carries the fire front. In this assessment there were few gaps horizontally,
equalling a higher risk of fire spread. Mass of fuel was very high (wet eucalypt 14t/hectare) with a
high fuel load. This means there is a potential for bigger flames, higher heat, faster spread and
higher impact severity. The time since the last fire was a long time ago, so fuel biomass is very high.
In the area surveyed (and all adjacent areas) the surface fuel was almost complete in it horizontal
spread, and almost completely evenly covered at a depth of 5cm. This would mean there would be
no pause in a fire, and it could potentially spread in any direction. The depth of the fuel would mean
taller flames, giving opportunity for fuel higher up to catch fire more readily.
Elevated: The elevated fuel is less flammable but contributes to total heat release in a fire. The more
gaps horizontally, such as in this case, can mean a slower spread of fire. In this case there were very
few instances of elevated fuel, living or dead. There were almost no dead/erect branches/tree, and
very few living small trees or bushes. Had there have been more elevate fuel, there would have been
potential for a longer burning fire, with more heat release and more potential for the upper canopy
to catch fire.
Bark: Bark is a ladder fuel to the higher canopy and is highly flammable. For the area being assessed,
there was no attached bark (it had become surface fuel), and the trees were smooth. A different
time of year (when bark is present), would see a higher risk of elevated fire and increase the spread
risk. Bark can become air-borne embers (light fibres) increasing the spread, especially with
ribbon/candle bark. These can produce spotting at distances over 2kms. Quantity of spotting from
such fires, makes it very difficult to control, if not impossible. Ribbon bark hazards never exceed Very
High.
A fire can climb any tree that has attached bark, with the risk increasing dramatically with bark that
is previously uncharred, thick, and easily loosened by hand. Thicker fibrous/stringy bark can burn for
up to 10 minutes and contributes to high canopy burning.
Other bark type (ironbark, coarse, papery, flake) hazards never exceed High.
ii.
Implications on slope findings for fire behaviour: Slope has critical impact on fire behaviour,
especially speed of spread.
The slope of the assessed area was 5 degrees heading uphill towards buildings. The slope would
increase the rate of spread of the fire, as unburnt material would more easily catch fire on the
upslope. On average, fire spreads faster by double per 10 degrees upslope. Hypothetically if on the
flat the fire was spreading at 10km/h, then at 5 degrees upslope it is possible it could travel at
15km/h up-slope. This would decrease the time available to prepare for an evacuation of building
positioned up-slope, compared to a fire that was travelling on a flat or down slope.
iii.
My perspective:
Factors such as high surface fuel load make the area assessed is a HIGH risk area. Contribution factors
such as upwards slope to housing also makes any potential fire faster spreading compared to one
travelling over flat areas, giving less time for the occupants to leave.
As someone who has lived in a fire prone area before, my plan (when living in an at-risk area), has
always been to go. Not only for my own safety, but for those around me who would take my actions
into consideration when reflecting on their own. It is slightly easier to make the hard decision to go,
when you know others who you are close to, are making the same decision.
I think a rating that was LOW or MODERATE would potentially see me defend the property in this
scenario. However, if I was told by authorities that leaving was recommended, then I would leave.
LIVING WITH FIRE – AT2
ILOS: Describe the effect of fire behaviour drivers on fire management and emergency response (criterion 5)
Criterion
1. Quantify surface, near
surface, elevated, bark and
overall hazard and slope (30%)
High Distinction (HD)
You have accurately quantified
all relevant types of fuel hazard
and the slope, providing all
details required by the
template.
Distinction (DN)
You have accurately quantified all
but one of the relevant types of
fuel hazard and the slope,
providing all details required by the
template.
Credit (CR)
You have accurately quantified at
least three of the relevant types
of fuel hazard and the slope,
providing most of the details
required by the template.
Pass (PP)
You have accurately quantified at
least two of the relevant types of
hazard or one type of fuel and
the slope, but the others are
missing or inaccurate and/or
many details are missing from
the template.
Fail (NN)
Did not meet standards for a
pass
2. Provide photographs to
support your fuel hazard
assessment (10%)
The content of all of the
images is clear and they
provide strong supporting
evidence for the fuel hazard
assessment
The content of most of the images
is clear and they provide supporting
evidence for the fuel hazard
assessment
The content of some the images is
unclear or their relevance for the
fuel hazard assessment is unclear
The content of some of the
images is unclear and their
relevance for the fuel hazard
assessment is unclear
Supporting evidence is
missing
3. Explain how each
component of fuel hazard
would affect fire behaviour
(25%)
You have clearly, accurately
and concisely explained how all
three chosen components of
fuel hazard would affect fire
behaviour.
You have accurately explained how
all three chosen components of
fuel hazard would affect fire
behaviour.
You have accurately explained
how at least two of the
components of fuel hazard would
affect fire behaviour.
You have accurately explained
how at least one of the
components of fuel hazard would
affect fire behaviour.
Did not meet standards for a
pass
4. Explain how the slope
would affect rate of spread of
a fire moving towards your
home (or relevant building)
(10%)
You have clearly, accurately
and concisely explained how
slope would affect rate of
spread.
You have clearly and accurately
explained how slope would affect
rate of spread.
You have accurately explained
how slope would affect rate of
spread but some element of your
explanation is unclear.
Your explanation is inaccurate
but shows some evidence of
understanding the underlying
concepts.
Did not meet standards for a
pass
5. Explain whether and why
your assessment has altered
your perspective on whether
to stay and defend your home
(or the perspective of the
relevant person) (25%)
You have clearly, concisely and
thoughtfully explained
whether and why your
assessment has altered your
perspective. Your answer
clearly and explicitly relates
back to your fuel hazard and
slope assessment results.
You have clearly explained whether
and why your assessment has
altered your perspective. Your
answer clearly relates back to your
fuel hazard and slope assessment
results.
You have explained whether and
why your assessment has altered
your perspective.
You have explained whether your
assessment has altered your
perspective. However you have
not justified your answer or
linked it back to your fuel hazard
and slope results.
Did not meet standards for a
pass