Book review: “Currowan”

Sometimes a popular publication might have more impact than formal inquiries. IBG member Lyndsay Holme has reviewed an important book for our blog: Bronwyn Adcock’s “Currowan: The story of a fire and a community during Australia’s worst summer” (Black Inc Books, 2021).

He found the book a powerful evocation of this huge and damaging fire, its impact on local communities and what it means for how we we prepare for and deal with bushfire…

A vivid and terrifying glimpse of not just our future but also our present.

Sophie Cunningham, Melbourne-based author

A searing account of surviving Australia’s Black Summer, laced with grim warnings about how exposed the country still is to more catastrophic bushfires.

Michel Rowland, editor of ‘Black Summer’ and host of ABC News Breakfast

A raw account of the Black Summer bushfires, combining vivid eyewitness testimony with a storyteller’s eye for detail and nuance. This story matters: not just as a memoir of loss and destruction and ragged weeks under orange skies, but as a warning for next time. Bronwyn Adcock brings this horror fire season to life, forcing us to ask whether the right lessons have been learned. Accounts like this are essential reading if we are to have any chance of preventing a recurrence.

Scott Ludlam, author of ‘Full Circle’

In Currowan, Bronwyn Adcock very ably moves between personal encounter and emotions and journalistic analysis as she develops this factual account of her experience of the fire from the start of this extraordinarily long and intense fire season. The fire began as a lightning strike on 25th November 2019, in tinder dry vegetation in Currowan State Forest. This was deep in remote and forested public land, adjoining several major wilderness national parks on the New South Wales south coast, in the Shoalhaven local government area. It became a major fire that ran for 74 days, over an area of 499,628 hectares (almost twice the area of Blue Mountains National Park).

The fire directly resulted in the deaths of three people, each of whom were experienced in fire fighting but were overrun by the swift and sudden advance of the fire on a dangerous “blow-up” day. Over 300 houses were destroyed and 178 damaged, as were hundreds of sheds and outbuildings and communications and power infrastructure. Countless businesses were impacted. The fire caused the loss of many millions of native wildlife, farm animals and agricultural lands, with irreparable damage to natural habitats and native plant species.

Bronwyn Adcock lives on bushland acreage, which was badly damaged, just outside of the small village of Bawley Point, near Batemans Bay, an area in the Shoalhaven that was severely affected by the fire. She recounts not only her own situation and emotions felt during the fires but also those of the people from communities nearby.

“Adaptation, or building resilience as it’s sometimes called, is one of the most pressing issues Australia faces. We are one of the most climate-exposed countries in the world – recent research suggests that more than 380,000 existing homes are at high risk of exposure to extreme weather, be it bushfires, flood or coastal inundation. Figuring out how to best prepare ourselves, our homes, our infrastructure is challenging, in part because there is no stable baseline to plan from”. (Adcock)

As I read these lines, I keep wondering where in all this is “Resilience New South Wales”, the recently formed organization designed to address these issues by the state government and headed by the former Rural Fire Commissioner? Adcock writes: “As profoundly shocking as the fire season of 2019-20 was, we are likely to see much worse.”

And so it is that we need to build sustainable building and planning mechanisms and implement them. Already it is happening to some degree within fire-affected communities. In Kangaroo Valley, Bilpin and Cobargo, local residents are initiating community fire planning and self-support groups through local neighbourhood centres.  They are pressing local and state government on urgent and relevant needs for safe infrastructure, including adequate access and egress from isolated communities, emergency power generators for small groups of houses and villages and adequate protection around communications infrastructure on the south coast. But nowhere to be seen, it appears, are federal and state governments giving any serious consideration to such concerning community shortcomings two years on from the fire.

“Even just a small amount of aerial resources – a helicopter to stop a new spot fire becoming a problem for another day, another line-scan plane so residents could be warned a fire was coming …could have made a profound difference. It’s hard to see the federal government’s fiddling over (sic – such things)…in the lead-up to the fire season and while the country burned – as anything but colossal negligence.“(Adcock)

This was despite the repeated warnings from climate scientists, University of Tasmania fire scientist Professor David Bowman, meteorologists and the Emergency Leaders for Climate Change (a group of retired professional heads of fire fighting agencies from across the country headed by retired NSW Fire and Rescue Commissioner, Greg Mullins).

Shoalhaven Bushfire Controller, Mark Williams “maintains his greatest adversary by far was the unprecedented dryness of the landscape. This was land that wanted to burn, incited by extreme weather. ‘What level of resources would we have needed to hold this on any given day? I couldn’t put a figure on it, to be perfectly honest.’”

Adcock conveys the quiet, but slowly controlled anger of many of the impacted, at the lack of initiative and perception shown by many of our country’s political leaders, their arrogant disregard of clear warnings on where we are headed as the reality of climate change impacts on our communities, landscapes and infrastructure. She is passionate but does not lose sight of reality from where she sits in both geographical and analytical observation. She keeps the narrative on track with the developing emergency in her own neighbourhood, but is also clear that this is not an isolated occurrence. She refers throughout the book to other communities similarly affected up and down the east coast and tablelands of Australia, as well as where we are being impacted on a planetary basis.

Communities are pressing governments to act at the same time that business and insurance companies are feeling the financial impact from recurring natural disruptions and the population has to dig deeper into their collective pocket. Risk management is playing an increasingly larger role in initiating pressure on governments to respond to the reality of climate change impacts world-wide. An economic argument is the strongest one to ensure that governments react urgently and responsibly towards the citizens they represent.

This publication is a strong, thoughtful plea for vigilance, planning and preparation for the future at all levels. There are a few minor inaccuracies with her depiction of some details, nomenclature and descriptions of how fire agencies operate, but these don’t detract from her account of how most events played out and how people responded to them. I found her description of “back country” a little folksy; to me it will always be “the bush”. She has consulted widely with the people described in the book, including members of her local community and others more widely known, such as Greg Mullins, Peter Dunn, retired ACT Emergency Services head and resident of fire-affected Conjola Park, and Mark Williams, RFS Shoalhaven Bushfire District Superintendent, who was at the forefront of the Currowan Incident Management Team, together with some of IBG’s former fire fighting colleagues and current members.

“I’ve been watching the 2021 fire season in the northern hemisphere with alarm – it is truly an emergency. To stay sane I try to focus on the small leaps forward – like the way the first boobook owl since the fires has returned to our property, sitting unmoving on a low branch outside my studio, pivoting its head to watch me as I walk up the hill at night.

But mostly I just think, what have we done?” (Adcock)

Climate change is causing bigger fires

A major CSIRO study has found that forest fires in Australia have been getting bigger, and the main reason is human-caused climate change.

CSIRO is Australia’s premier government research agency. The paper titled “Multi-decadal increase of forest burned area in Australia is linked to climate change“ was published in the scientific journal Nature Communications. CSIRO published their own news release, and the story was widely covered in the media (eg. 1 2 3)

The team of 8 researchers used satellite and ground-based information on forest area burned, coupled with climate and weather data and simulated fuel loads, over the past 90 years. They found an overall linear increase in total area burned per annum but an exponential increase during autumn and winter.

CSIRO also found forest areas are being burned more often. Most disturbingly, the frequency of ‘megafire years’ (when more than a million hectares burnt, has “markedly increased since 2000“. Comparing 1988-2001 to 2002-2019, the area burned per year has increased by 800%.

In relation to climate change, the paper says: “Australia’s mean temperature has increased by 1.4 °C since 1910 with a rapid increase in extreme heat events, while rainfall has declined in the southern and eastern regions of the continent.” This has specific implications for bushfires:

“The increase in forest burned area is consistent with increasingly more dangerous fire weather conditions, increased risk factors associated with pyroconvection, including fire-generated thunderstorms, and increased ignitions from dry lightning, all associated to varying degrees with anthropogenic climate change.”

Interestingly, the researchers also considered the Continuous Haines index (C-Haines, a measure of atmospheric instability) to “indicate a high chance of extreme wildfires such as those with thunderstorm formation in fire plumes“. These conditions are associated with extreme and dangerous fire behaviour and occurred to an unprecedented extent in the 2019-2020 season.

The role of prescribed burning was also analysed:

“We found no changes in the mean annual area of prescribed burning over the past 32 years, although we have no information on how successful those burns were in reducing fuel loads. However, given the lack of trend and the fact that on average, only 1% of forests are subject to fuel reduction burns every year, it is very likely that fuel management had no effect on the observed multi-decadal increasing trend in the burned area of forest fires. We also note that the main objective of fuel management is to reduce fire risk and severity, which might or might not result in reduced total burned area.”

Grimly, the researchers find that the trend of bigger and more frequent forest fires is likely to get worse under future projected climate change.

IBG comment

  • This study confirms what many other researchers and experts have been saying, that fires are getting worse and will get worse still if climate change is not brought under control.
  • It also confirms that we need to adapt our fire management methods to these more challenging conditions. Adaptation to our worsening fire climate is a priority for IBG advocacy. We have argued for a suite of improvements to reduce bushfire impacts on communities, firefighters and the environment.
  • Critical measures include rapid suppression of fires, improved firefighting strategies and building more resilience into at-risk communities. More effective analysis and review of past fires is fundamental to ongoing improvement.
  • IBG analysis and suggestions are detailed in our comprehensive submission to the NSW Independent Bushfire Inquiry.

Reference links

Forests, fires & carbon

The United Nations has analysed 257 World Heritage forest sites (some in Australasia) and found that overall this forest network has played a vital role in mitigating climate change, by absorbing 190 million tons of CO2 from the atmosphere every year. 

Forests of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area

The UNESCO report, “World Heritage forests: Carbon sinks under pressure”, covered in The Guardian, found that the 69 million hectares of forest also store substantial amounts of carbon. The carbon sequestration  by these forests over long periods has led to total carbon storage of  approximately 13  billion tons.

But there is bad news too: 10 of the forests have become net sources of carbon over the past 20 years, due to pressure from human activity and climate change. The million-hectare Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is one of these, as are Yosemite National Park and a rainforest reserve in Sumatra. For the Greater Blue Mountains, the threats/factors cited for this situation are: “Habitat shifting/alteration, droughts, temperature extremes, storms/flooding, fire/fire suppression”.

The report also says: “Since the mid-2010s, intense wildfires associated with extreme temperatures and drought conditions have been a cause of high emissions at some sites. The most prominent examples are wildfires in the Russian Federation’s Lake Baikal in 2016, and in Australia’s Tasmanian Wilderness and Greater Blue Mountains Area in 2019 and 2020.” Some 79% of the Greater Blue Mountains WHA was burnt in the Black Summer fires of 2019-20, to varying severity1.

Forests of the Tasmanian Wilderness WHA are threatened by repeated large scale wildfires (South West NP)

The UNESCO report is fundamentally an argument for the importance of World Heritage forests and how their role as carbon stores can be retained. These two quotes are notable:

  • World Heritage forests provide critical climate benefits only if safeguarded from threats.
  • World Heritage forests and their surrounding landscapes require strong and sustained protection to maintain their roles as carbon sinks and stable carbon stores for future generations.

Other world heritage areas in our neighbourhood ranked very highly for carbon storage and as net carbon sinks – Tasmanian Wilderness, Te Wahipounamu South West NZ, Lorentz National Park (West Irian) and Tongariro National Park (NZ). Fire in some of these areas is either unknown or minimal.

Hooker Wilderness, Te Wahipounamu WHA, New Zealand – a forest/alpine area where fire is barely known.

IBG Comment

  • Large-scale fires, especially if intense, release large volumes of stored carbon. When drought conditions are conducive to large fires its even more important to keep fires small with strong initial attack and the best strategies, as IBG advocates.
  • While the Blue Mountains fires of 2019-20 caused a massive release of carbon, the area is now taking up atmospheric carbon with intensive regrowth, supported by good rains after the fires.
  • IBG sees it as critical that future fire planning and management for the Blue Mountains and other large forest areas (eg. Gondwanan Rainforests WHA, Australian Alps, Tasmania) put a high priority on carbon budgets.
  • This needs to include protection of moist forest types that store the greatest carbon (rainforest and tall open eucalypt forest), and which also act to inhibit wildfire in the landscape under most conditions.
  • Better wildfire suppression and careful use of planned fire are other key planks to managing fire for carbon, biodiversity and community protection.
  • The alternative is that climate change driven fires could push ecological change and reduce the capacity of our forests to store carbon.
Carbon-rich tall open eucalypt forest, Blue Mountains National Park (GBMWHA)

Burning books

Two recent books offer important contributions to the bushfire discussion, but by very different authors and from quite different perspectives.

Currowan: The story of a fire and a community during Australia’s worst summer, by distinguished journo Bronwyn Adcock, is very much based on her personal community experiences in the giant fire of that name on the NSW South Coast. She has researched and talked to many other residents, firefighters and fire managers to pull together a gripping account, trying to understand what happened in the fire and to affected communities. Admirably, Adcock doesn’t flinch from examining serious issues, not only around this fire, but how we as a nation can deal with a more dangerous bushfire future.

One review of Currowan can be read here, and see here for IBG analysis of some events of the Currowan fire, which helped to inform Adcock’s book.

Meanwhile, Greg Mullins is on the inside looking out. He has written Firestorm – battling super-charged natural disasters. Mullins is the former head of Fire and Rescue NSW and a volunteer firefighter with the NSW Rural Fire Service. But he is best known to the public in his activist role with Emergency Leaders for Climate Action (ELCA), the eminent group who tried to warn governments, and notably the Prime Minister, about the threat of the 2019-2020 summer, a threat that was so sadly realised.

In the book, Mullins applies his long personal experience, especially of the Black Summer fires, to the challenge of bushfires driven by climate change. He argues that the most important thing we can do to avoid ongoing disasters is to rapidly reduce carbon emissions. He also suggests ways to strengthen our fire management capacity and adapt to worse fires in the future, which are already inevitable.

Mullins can be viewed talking about Firestorm to Kerry O’Brien in this Climate Council podcast and to The Guardian in this article.

By reaching a mass audience, these two books may well have a greater influence on public understanding than processes like the NSW Independent Bushfire Inquiry. We can be grateful they have each been written by professionals (of different kinds) with a keen eye on the truth and evidence.

Rural boundary clearing

The NSW Government has released the Rural Boundary Clearing Code which allows rural landholders to clear vegetation up to 25 metres inside their property boundaries for the purpose of bushfire protection. The adoption of the Code activates an amendment to the Rural Fires Act 1997 (section 100RA) which was passed as part of the Bushfires Legislation Amendment Bill in November 2020.

The new code only applies to rural areas of NSW that are bush fire prone. Landholders cannot clear neighbouring land. A Rural Boundary Clearing Tool interactive map is available where the status of individual properties under the code can be searched. The Code includes environmental provisions which constrain boundary clearing.

A report in the Sydney Morning Herald points out that this measure was not recommended by the NSW Bushfire Inquiry. What the Inquiry did recommend was that vegetation clearing policies be made “clear and easy to navigate for the community… without undue cost or complexity” (Recommendation 28). The SMH story and a broadcast from the ABC PM program include a range of comments from various sources, many of them critical of the initiative.

IBG comment

  • IBG has long argued that asset protection measures need to be focused close to the assets, to maximise benefit while reducing unnecessary impact.
  • IBG advocates for evidence-based bushfire management and has therefore previously expressed concerns about the boundary clearing legislation (see Media Release 11 Nov 2020). Any measures need to be part of a coherent and multi-tenure local risk management program.
  • No analysis or evidence has been presented to support boundary clearing as an effective bushfire mitigation tool. Fire risk and fire paths do not recognise property boundaries and boundaries are not necessarily close to assets.
  • Clearing under the Code poses the risk of significant and widespread ecological impacts through habitat fragmentation while achieving little for fire mitigation.
  • Boundary clearing is a simplistic response to a complex issue. Bushfire risk could actually be increased where clearing replaces forest with drier and more fire-prone grassland and shrubland. Fires can easily spot across even wider breaks under severe conditions. Felled trees in windrows can pose a firefighting hazard if not removed or when burnt.
  • Poorly-considered bushfire measures distract resources and action away from more effective responses.
  • The code places the onus on landholders to comply with the law and relies on self-assessment, with no apparent oversight or monitoring of vegetation cleared, effectiveness or impacts.

Reference links

Assets of Intergenerational Significance

On National Threatened Species Day (7 September) the NSW Government announced a ‘zero extinction’ target for NSW national parks, along with 221 ‘assets of intergenerational significance’ (AIS) covering the locations of 92 threatened species across 110 conservation reserves1. These follow the initial declaration under new legislation of the iconic Wollemi Pine as the first AIS in January.

In his announcement, Environment Minister Matt Kean said these declarations “are a game changer for threatened species, triggering the strongest possible legal protections – mandating conservation plans, targeted feral animal control, bespoke fire management and monitoring and reporting“1.

The Guardian reports that AIS declarations were introduced after the 2019-20 bushfire disaster and that the list includes “15 of the most important strongholds for the koala and seven sites where the endangered brush-tailed rock-wallaby is found‘2.

An interactive map shows all the sites and species which include the Alpine She-oak Skink and Broad-toothed Rat in Kosciuszko National Park, Dwarf Mountain Pine in Blue Mountains NP, Rufous Scrub-bird in Border Ranges NP and NSW-extinct mammals re-introduced to Sturt NP and Mallee Cliffs NP.

IBG comment

  • This initiative came out of the blue when the Rural Fires Act was being amended in the aftermath of Black Summer (2019-2020). The main push for amending the RF Act was to allow clearing along private boundary fences, a dubious and potentially destructive ‘bushfire protection’ measure about which IBG raised concerns.
  • IBG understands the AIS initiative came out of wrangling within government over how to respond to Black Summer (2019-2020). The NSW Bushfire Inquiry had suggested that critical environmental assets should receive protection second only to human life (ie. above property), but did not actually make a recommendation to that effect.
  • Important environmental assets like threatened species and Aboriginal cultural features have long been mapped as part of local bushfire planning, however it has proved challenging to have them recognised and protected during firefighting operations. This is demonstrated by many examples from the Black Summer fires.
  • With legal power behind AIS, IBG hopes this will enhance the protection of these sites, when possible, during bushfires. This does not have to be disruptive, as experience shows it is often just as easy to take a protective approach as the opposite.
  • However the proof of the pudding is still to come, including AIS conservation plans (which include public input), effective integration into bushfire planning and actual protection.
  • It is understood that more AIS sites are coming.

2nd progress report on NSW Bushfire Inquiry

The NSW Government is issuing quarterly reports on progress with implementing the recommendations of the NSW Independent Bushfire Inquiry. The second progress report was released by Resilience NSW at the end of August, covering the period April to June 2021. This report highlights investment in a number of areas, including firefighter protection, fire control centres and hazard reduction.

IBG comment

  • The many areas of progress are welcome and if followed through should result in significant improvements to bushfire outcomes.
  • The NSW Bushfire Inquiry and NSW Government missed an important opportunity to frame the disparate inquiry recommendations into a more comprehensive strategic approach with clear objectives.
  • IBG has previously commented: “The [first] progress report reads as a list of unconnected actions, without a plan to tie them together. We encourage the NSW government to weld the recommendations and other actions into a bushfire suppression strategy aimed at constantly improving how to keep fires small and limit their impact“.
  • NSW needs a Bushfire Suppression Strategy which goes beyond the limited recommendations of the inquiry.
  • Accountability for inquiry outcomes was the first recommendation of the NSW Independent Bushfire Inquiry. Quarterly public reporting was established by the NSW Opposition, who moved an amendment to the Bushfires Legislation Amendment Bill 2020. IBG had earlier called for a transparent monitoring process (see IBG media release).
  • Tracking recommendations with regular reporting is a major step forward in reform and transparency, especially compared with previous inquiries – as highlighted by the NSW Audit Office.
  • Some of the actions seem to relate only vaguely to the recommendations. Tracking does not currently include any measures of success, ie. are the actions reported actually achieving the intent of recommendations? This critical oversight was pointed out by the NSW Audit Office in relation to previous inquiries and could be rectified for the third reporting period.

Reference links

Dixie fire, California

According to official sources the Dixie Fire in California (USA) has been burning since 14 July, across Plumas National Forest, Lassen National Forest, Lassen Volcanic National Park and five counties. It merged with the Fly Fire and as of 5 September had reached a burnt area of 360,000 hectares with 3,820 personnel deployed1. Fuel moistures are ‘historically low’ with light winds and relative humidity falling to 10% in the afternoons1.

The fire is currently reported as burning within containment lines1, but fire practitioner and commentator Zeke Lunder posted a report2 on 31 August about a backburn that escaped (they call it ‘firing’). He writes “we put four miles of extra fire on the ground, doubled the potential head of the fire and gave it a one-day head start going into a two-day wind event“2. He puts it down to the urge to “Do something! Do anything!” but “when the conditions set us up for failure“2.

Lunder includes a balanced discussion of backburning and the issues around ‘firing’ in risky conditions, even when they are successful. He also asks:

“Why are we still focused on containment, when it’s clear that parts of this fire are beyond our control? We are resorting to desperate measures that increase the negative outcomes of the fire, wearing out the firefighters we’ll need later when our escaped burns are knocking on back doors…”2

IBG Comment

  • IBG analysis shows the sort of situation reported by The Lookout occurred a number of times in our own Black Summer fires (see IBG report “Reducing the costs and Impacts of bushfires“ for examples).
  • Large backburns during drought conditions require thorough planning and preparation and well-resourced implementation plans. Not doing a backburn that has a high risk of escape can be an appropriate strategy. This option may reduce the overall impact of fire.
  • On the recommendation of a NSW Bushfire Inquiry after the 2019-2020 fires, the NSW Rural Fire Service adopted a new Operational Protocol for Backburning in February 2021. The previous version dated from 2006. However the new protocol was not based on rigorous analysis of successful and unsuccessful backburns. IBG regards the new OP as an important step forward but with several shortcomings, and look forward to its application in the field and its ongoing improvement.
  • The US InciWeb site is a fine example of how detailed information about fire events can be provided to assist the community . The site is “an interagency all-risk incident information management system” and was set up to 1) Provide the public a single source of incident related information and 2) Provide a standardized reporting tool for the Public Affairs community3.

NSW bushfire coronials start

The State Coroner is conducting a series of coronial inquests and inquiries relating to the 2019-20 NSW bushfire season (Black Summer). Public proceedings began on 25 August with an opening address from Counsel Assisting Adam Casselden, SC. He explained the process and listed 91 fires that would be examined. Public hearings will commence on 6 September at Lidcombe Coroners Court and will run into mid 2022 at several locations from south to north, to be followed by a second stage looking at selected case studies to highlight systemic issues emerging from the first stage.

Details of dates and locations of hearings and which fires will be covered can be found in the Public Hearings Information Paper. Hearings will be live-streamed.

The main focus is on the origin and cause of fires, and on fires that caused the 25 deaths and property loss. Mr Casselden also mentioned the impacts on wildlife and environment. Official information emphasises that “coronial hearings are not a trial”, and says that: “The purpose is to inquire into relevant events and gather information about what happened. The purpose of the proceedings is not to lay blame or to make decisions about the liability of any person or organisation because of the fires”.

The Sydney Morning Herald report of the opening address described the coroner’s approach regarding previous inquiries, fuel levels and backburning.

IBG comment

  • Neither the NSW Independent Bushfire Inquiry nor the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements were able to examine specific bushfire events in any detail. These Coronial inquiries are capable of filling this critical gap, and IBG has high hopes that in doing so they will be able to extract critical lessons learned.
  • IBG strongly supports that the coronial inquiries will not lay blame or assign liability. All bushfire review processes should be blame-free and focus on what happened not who did it.
  • IBG continues to stress the need for detailed technical analysis of fires, something that does not feature in any recent or current NSW process. Such analysis would produce a common understanding of the facts (what happened) to then enable critical review of what worked and what could be done better.
  • The coronial process is rather opaque, but it is understood that investigating police have submitted briefs of evidence with witness statements. It is unknown what events or issues have been identified for further investigation, or what role the government will play.
  • It is hoped that the process involves expert independent advice on the science and practice of bushfire suppression.

Reference links

Bushfire Survivors win historic legal case on climate

On 26 August the NSW Land and Environment Court handed down an historic ruling. Chief Justice of the Court Brian Preston found that the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has a duty to take serious action on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. The case was mounted by Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action (BSCA), represented by the Environmental Defenders Office (EDO).

The EDO said: “This is the first time an Australian court has ruled on a government agency failing to perform a statutory duty to address climate change.” The court found “the EPA is compelled by its own legislation to seriously address the state’s greenhouse gas emissions and climate change”.1

BSCA President Jo Dodds said:…the EPA must now also work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state. Global warming is creating the conditions that can lead to hotter and fiercer fires, and all of us need to work to make sure we’re doing everything we can to prevent a disaster like we saw during 2019 and 2020.2

Justice Preston’s ruling says: “The Environment Protection Authority, in accordance with s 9(1)(a) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991 (NSW), is to develop environmental quality objectives, guidelines and policies to ensure environment protection from climate change.”

 In his judgement, Justice Preston wrote that while the EPA had argued it had “developed instruments in ostensible performance of its duty, I have found that those instruments did not meet the statutory description of the instruments required” by the Act.3

The ABC reported that the Court “did not find that the EPA should act on specific targets”, and that the EPA was reviewing the judgement and implications.4

In The Conversation, environmental law academic Laura Schuijers wrote that “…simply having policies and strategies isn’t enough. The court made it clear aspirational and descriptive plans won’t cut the mustard if there’s nothing to ‘set any objectives or standards, impose any requirements, or prescribe any action to be taken to ensure the protection of the environment’.”5

  • 1 “Bushfire Survivors Hail Landmark Legal Win On Climate“, EDO website, 26 August 2021
  • 2 “Bushfire Survivors Hail Landmark Legal Win On Climate“, EDO website, 26 August 2021
  • 3 Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Incorporated v Environment Protection Authority [2021] NSWLEC 92, decision date 26 August, 2021, NSW Case Law website, http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/17b7569b9b3625518b58fd99
  • 4 “Bushfire survivors win landmark climate change case against NSW EPA“, ABC NSW Country Hour, 26 August 2021
  • 5 “Bushfire survivors just won a crucial case against the NSW environmental watchdog, putting other states on notice“, The Conversation, 27 August, 2021

IBG comment

  • Rapidly reducing Australia’s own emissions and acting strenuously on the world stage are critical to reducing future damage from bushfires. We must also adapt our fire management methods for already locked-in climate change.
  • This case, and several others recently, shows that governments cannot just put high-sounding words into legislation and then fail to deliver on them. People notice, they take action, and courts take a dim view.
  • Schuijers’ comment that “simply having policies and strategies isn’t enough” reflects IBG concerns with many bushfire documents, notably the way NSW inquiry recommendations are being tracked, with no measures for success.
  • The ruling could be a profound step in the right direction…or it could be ignored or side-stepped. Australian governments have in the past amended legislation that has become troublesome.

Reference links