A critical internal report has revealed a series of failures, including "generic" and "inadequate" fire plans, contributed to an out-of-control prescribed burn in Western Australia's far north that damaged a wilderness retreat.
The review by the Office of Bushfire Risk Management (OBRM) probed mistakes made in the lead-up to an aerial planned burn ignited by the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) at Carson River Station on July 15, 2020.
The fire escaped containment lines and burned out of control for a week.
The flames reached Faraway Bay retreat more than 70 kilometres away on the remote Kimberley coast, where it caused about $20,000 worth of damage and prompted criticism from its owner.
The OBRM review, obtained by the ABC through a Freedom of Information request, identified "a range of areas in which DFES carried a high level of unmanaged risk".
"The depth, quality, and integrity of DFES's risk management system and processes have significant room for improvement in comparison to other organisations using planned fire and aerial ignition," the report said.
"The credibility of DFES as the lead fire agency in Western Australia will be harmed if this situation is not adequately rectified."
Inappropriate planning
The report focused heavily on the pre-planning stage prior to the fuel-reduction burn, during which department workers completed Prescribed Fire Plans (PFPs) to guide those on the ground, especially should things go wrong.
It found DFES Kimberley's aerial planned burns were underpinned by plans produced by a division based in Perth.
"The PFPs appear to be generic across the entire program. This approach has produced standardised plans that are not tailored to different contexts and are therefore inadequate," the report found.
The report found contingency plans for the 2020 prescribed burn were pre-filled with inappropriate and irrelevant statements for a fire lit from the air in the vast, remote landscape.
For example, the plan included instructions to directly attack the blaze using available firefighting appliances and, if that failed, fall back to roads to initiate a parallel or indirect attack.
But these approaches are inconsistent with the undeveloped landscape of the northern Kimberley.
"It is highly unlikely that this plan was seriously considered by operational practitioners," the report said.
Burn ignited in risky conditions
The report also found that DFES went ahead with the burn even though grass had dried beyond safe levels.
"Grassland curing [a week before ignition] was recorded as 76 per cent. The parameters in the PFP were 50 to 70 per cent," the report said.
"The decision to ignite, when the minimum relative humidity was 12 per cent and the degree of curing … was trending upwards, doesn't appear to have triggered a review of risk nor any apparent repeat of the checking, endorsement and approval process."
The inquiry also found there was not enough high-level scrutiny of the overall fire plan, and whether it was appropriate to carry out the burn.
DFES joins bushfire assurance program
In a statement, a DFES spokesperson said the service had joined other agencies in signing up to the OBRM's Assurance Program.
"By signing up to the program, DFES has committed to aligning with the Australian standard for risk management and adopting best practice," the spokesperson said.
"Prescribed Fire Plans are prepared in all regions, including the Kimberley, in collaboration with land managers, fire practitioners, and technical specialists to ensure they are effective and relevant to local conditions.
"DFES isn't aware of any aerial planned burns in the Kimberley extending well beyond their intended boundaries and impacting private property since the review was completed."
Perth-Kimberley disconnect
Fuel reduction burns are a routine occurrence in the Kimberley, with multiple agencies, landowners, and Indigenous groups working to reduce the potential for large dry-season bushfires.
The report found there had been "few unintended outcomes" from DFES's aerial planned burning program in the Kimberley in more than 30 years.
It also made clear its findings should not be used to reduce the overall extent of the early season burning program, given its importance to the wider community.
It is a sentiment shared by Charles Darwin University fire researcher Rohan Fisher.
"The sort of burning that's being done across the Kimberley, overall, has been really successful in reducing the amount of fire," Dr Fisher said.
"The worst outcome of these sorts of events is [becoming] fire shy … if you burn less, that will result in larger, more severe, less controllable late dry-season fires."
Dr Fisher said the report highlighted the issue of metropolitan fire management thinking being out of step with the landscape and conditions of northern Australia.
"I've seen it in Queensland and WA where you get a lot of the language of burn planning coming from south-eastern or south-western landscapes," he said.
"One of the additional issues that some government agencies have in the far north, in particular the Kimberley, is maintaining staff with that local knowledge of the landscape and the conditions.
"That sort of knowledge can really help facilitate good planning."