A lasting lesson and teaching event legacy of the 1961 Western Australian bushfires

Dwellingup, Western Australia, 1961.

In 1961, from 20 to 24 January, a series of large, destructive bushfires burned in the forested south-west region of Western Australia.

A subsequent Royal Commission investigated causes and made recommendations to enhance controlled burning that had profound implications, not only in the tall eucalypts of the south-west WA, but across Australia for many years.

Guest writer John O’Donnell looks back on the anniversary of the 1961 fires and sees lessons for today.

The 1961 south west Western Australian bushfires provided a classic, rare case study where the recommendations of a Royal Commission and lessons learnt by firefighters were taken seriously by the government, and land and fire management agencies, in particular the Western Australian Forests.

Over time, virtually all of the and recommendations and lessons learnt were implemented. This resulted in significant decline in the annual area burnt by bushfires, and consequent bushfire losses.

Of all the major bushfires in Australia’s history, the author believes none has left such a deep and lasting legacy as the 1961 bushfires in Western Australia. They were not the deadliest fires Australia has seen but they were among the most influential. The 1961 Dwellingup fire in particular became an important case study for how bushfire was understood, managed, and mitigated in the decades that followed.

Sadly, in many bushfires in Australia, the bushfire mitigation and suppression lessons are not adequately captured nor retained over long periods.

Dwellingup, Western Australia, 1961.
Dwellingup, Western Australia, 1961.

A defining moment in fire management

The 1961 bushfires swept through vast tracts of forest in Western Australia, igniting between January and March across Dwellingup, Pemberton, the Shannon River region, and Augusta-Margaret River. The fires razed towns like Dwellingup and Karridale, destroyed 160 buildings, and caused an estimated $35 million in damages. Remarkably, no lives were lost – a testament to the skill and bravery of firefighters and the resilience of local communities.

What set these fires apart was not just their scale but the response they triggered. The Western Australian government convened a Royal Commission, led by Forester G.J. Rodger, to investigate the causes and recommend reforms. The inquiry’s 27 recommendations were not only logical but transformative, laying the foundation for a new era in bushfire management.

The author’s full report is here.

A forested landscape at risk

Prior to 1961, prescribed burning in Western Australia was limited and largely ineffective. Forest management focused on narrow buffer zones around assets, allowing fuel loads to accumulate dangerously across vast areas. Technical limitations-poor weather forecasting, lack of trained personnel, and rudimentary fire behaviour knowledge hampered efforts to implement broader burning strategies.

The result was a tinderbox. When lightning ignited multiple fires under extreme weather conditions, suppression efforts were quickly overwhelmed. Smoke rendered tower-based detection systems useless, and outdated equipment failed under pressure. The fires spread rapidly, culminating in the destruction of Dwellingup.

Capturing the 1961 bushfire teaching event and lessons

The Royal Commission’s findings resulted a comprehensive overhaul of fire management in Western Australia. Key reforms included:

  • Enhanced Equipment and Communication: Investment in modern radios, improved tanker trucks, and standardized pumper units.
  • Fire Behaviour Research: A dedicated program to understand fire dynamics and develop safer prescribed burning techniques.
  • Prescribed Burning Programs: Systematic fuel reduction became central to fire mitigation, with rotational burning schedules tailored to forest types.
  • Spotter Aircraft: Replacing unreliable tower systems, aerial detection improved response times and fire mapping.
  • Interagency Cooperation: Agreements between government bodies, local councils, and volunteer brigades fostered unified fire strategies.

These reforms were not merely theoretical. They were operationalized, tested, and refined over decades, resulting in a dramatic decline in bushfire extent and severity across the region.

Reinforcement of 1961 bushfire teaching and lesson capture in 1978 and 2023

The effectiveness of the 1961 reforms was reaffirmed in subsequent fire events. In December 1978, 27 fires ignited over one weekend due to lightning strikes. Thanks to regular fuel reduction and improved detection, crews contained all fires swiftly – most using only hand tools and knapsack sprays.

Similarly, in November 2023, 26 fires erupted south-east of Perth. Fuel-age mapping revealed that 20 of these were burning in areas treated within the last four years. Firefighters prioritized the remaining six, successfully containing them with minimal damage. These case studies underscore the critical role of fuel management in wildfire control.

The role of prescribed burning and fire systems

Prescribed burning emerged as a critical component of the Western Australia’s fire strategy. Research showed that under severe weather, fuel older than five years in jarrah forests and seven years in karri forests could carry uncontrollable crown fires. Burns less than a year old could halt fire runs, while areas with fuel less than five years old allowed for effective suppression.

To maintain safe fuel levels-below 8 tonnes per hectare in jarrah and 15 tonnes in karri – rotational burning schedules were implemented. These were informed by ongoing studies into fuel accumulation, fire intensity, and ecological impacts. Aerial burning techniques, pioneered jointly by the Forests Department and CSIRO, further enhanced efficiency and coverage.

Prescribed burning was just one component of a holistic fire management system. Other innovations included:

  • VHF/UHF Radio Systems: Replacing HF radios, these systems improved reliability under adverse conditions.
  • Structured Training and Command Systems: Ensuring readiness and coordination during emergencies.
  • Wildfire Threat Analysis: Prioritizing protection of high-value areas through strategic buffers and integrated planning.

Together, and with other measures, these measures created a robust framework that protected lives, property, and ecosystems for decades.

A warning from the past

Since the early 1990s, prescribed burning rates have dropped, leading to increased bushfire extent. Peet and Williamson (2025) warn that the forest estate now resembles its pre-1961 condition-dense, fuel-laden, and vulnerable.

This graph from the Bushfire Front (below) starkly illustrates this trend: as prescribed burning decreased, wildfire area has increased. Without ongoing commitment to fuel reduction and fire science, the hard-won gains of the past risk being undone.

Conclusions

The 1961 Dwellingup fire was a tragedy, but it was also a turning point. It taught Australians that suppression alone is insufficient, that science and planning are essential, and that communities must be prepared with a “Plan B.” It demonstrated the power of coordinated response, informed policy, and sustained commitment.

In south-east Australia, it is essential that such a critical lesson and teaching event is examined and all possible lessons captured, including optimised fire mitigation programs.

John is a retired district forester and an environmental manager for hydro-electric construction and road construction projects. His main interests are the mild maintenance burning of forests, trying to change the culture of massive fuel loads in our forests, establishing healthy and safe resilient landscapes, fire fighter safety, and town and city bushfire safety.

Dozens dead and hundreds of homes destroyed amid Chile wildfire outbreak

More than 500 firefighters are battling over two dozen wildfires throughout Chile with no end in sight as weather conditions worsen fire spread, according to National Forest Corporation officials.

Security Minister Luis Cordero on Monday said at least 19 people have died in the fires, while states of emergency and mass evacuations are in place in central and southern portions of the nation, according to CNN reporting. Thousands of residents sifted through the rubble that was once their homes on Monday morning.

National Forest Corporation officials on Monday said at least 25 wildfires are still burning throughout the country. Tankers and aircraft have been mobilized throughout the weekend. Minister of Agriculture Ignacia Fernández fires are expected to worsen due to forecast weather conditions.

“The situation in the region is worrying,” Fernández said in a press release on Monday. “The weather conditions today are going to be complicated and other fires could eventually break out … We will continue to reinforce calls for a complete halt to agricultural work during the hottest hours in those municipalities under a red alert. However, it is extremely important to appeal to the responsibility and awareness of each and every citizen to prevent new outbreaks of fire.”

Officials also floated possible curfews on Monday to maintain public order as officials begin recovery efforts.

“We are not ruling out any of the powers that the Joint Chiefs of Staff have to maintain public order and to assist in the region’s recovery,” Undersecretary of Defense Ricardo Montero said. “For now, our assessment is that it is not necessary, and we are using other forms of equipment, presence, and, especially, coordination among all the armed forces and the police.”

Officials were warning the country’s residents about the potential for widespread wildfires last Thursday as forecasters predicted temperatures near 100 degrees Fahrenheit, strong winds of up to 25 mph, and low relative humidity. Residents were advised to not use electrical tools or machinery outdoors, to not burn vegetation, and to not throw cigarette butts on the dry ground.

Also in South America, large wildfires have been ongoing in Argentine Patagonia since early January 2026, impacting vast areas of native forest and shrubland. According to the local authorities, the fires spread across the provinces of Chubut, Santa Cruz and Neuquén, burning over 15,000 hectares of land and prompting the evacuation of over 3,000 residents and tourists from affected areas.

This image (below), acquired on 11 January 2026 by one of the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellites, focuses on an active fire in the province of Chubut. Healthy vegetation appears in green, while burned areas are visible as dark brown and reddish patches. Bare soil is shown in cream tones and smoke plumes are visible drifting eastwards.

Argentina wildfires, January 2026. Credit: European Union, Copernicus Sentinel-2 imagery

The global cost of wildfires can be invisible and long-term: UN report

The costliest wildfire event of the year – the January fires in and around Los Angeles that directly claimed the lives of 30 people – burnt a relatively small 23,000 hectares (56,000 acres) but caused at least USD 53 billion in damages.

Of those damages, only USD 40 billion was insured, according to the global reinsurance company Munich Re.

Wildfires burned through 390 million hectares (964 million acres) in 2025 – equivalent to 92% of the European Union’s land area.

In 2025 the total cost of damages caused by all types of natural hazards has been calculated by Munich Re at USD 224 billion, of which USD 108 billion was insured.

In a clear demonstration of the disparity between cost of damages and other measurable impacts, the year’s second most expensive disaster, Myanmar’s 7.7 magnitude earthquake in March, had damages of around USD 12 billion; however its human cost was more than 4500 lives, with thousands more injured.

The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) has published the figures to show how the global reinsurance industry’s balance sheet forms a basis for how disasters are discussed, compared, and remembered. But while these numbers make the news cycle – and draw much-needed attention to rising disaster risks – they capture only part of the story.

The UNDRR notes that beyond the insured damage to homes and businesses lies a far larger set of costs – borne by communities, ecosystems, health systems, and future development – that rarely appear on balance sheets. These invisible costs affect recovery long after the flames are extinguished, and determine whether societies emerge more resilient or more vulnerable to the next shock. 

Wildfires rank among the most economically destructive hazards globally, and the costs are rising. Between 2014 and 2023, wildfires caused an estimated USD 106 billion in economic losses and USD 74 billion in insured losses globally – far exceeding losses in the previous decade, as found by the 2025 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR 2025). The United States accounts for most of these impacts, with nine of the ten most expensive wildfire events since 1970 occurring in the US, even before accounting for the January 2025 California wildfires, GAR 2025 shows.  

The countries most affected by wildfire in terms of land burned are overwhelmingly in Africa: during 2025, wildfires burned through nearly 390 million hectares worldwide (an area almost as large as the European Union), with over half of the total area (nearly 246 million hectares) in  Africa. These lands in Africa, mostly uninsured, are home to millions who suffer losses to their subsistence livelihoods, as well as the destruction of priceless environmental and cultural heritage. 

Australia recorded one of the largest proportions of land affected by wildfires during 2025. But unlike many other fire-affected regions, Australia benefits from long-standing, high-quality loss data, allowing wildfire impacts to be assessed over decades rather than inferred from isolated events. The report notes this as “area lost” but much of the fire in Australia is in the northern savannah regions that benefit from regular, low-intensity fires.

(The following graphics show the Percentage of wildfire burn in 2025, and the Total hectares burnt. Hover over the graphic for more details.)


The UNDRR concludes that global wildfire costs appear concentrated where assets are high value and insured – which is almost certainly not where impacts are greatest. 

From the perspective of insurers and reinsurers – the institutions that offer insurance to insurance companies to cover megalosses – 2025 stands out as a year of exceptional wildfire losses. 

GAR 2025 calculated that total losses from those fires – including insured, uninsured and long-term indirect costs – are even higher, and likely to exceed USD 250 billion, making it among the most expensive disasters on record. 

But most expensive doesn’t necessarily mean most destructive. What insured loss figures obscure is the duration and breadth of wildfire impacts.

“Even when data exists, it is often focused on direct impacts and not enough on indirect impacts. This is a major gap in how disaster risk is understood,” according to Kamal Kishore, head of UNDRR.

National 30-minute wildfire response law faces debate

US wildland fire agencies would be required to respond to wildfires within 30 minutes and deploy within three hours if the Wildfire Response and Preparedness Act is signed into law.

The mandated response time was described as a “commonsense” measure by Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany from Wisconsin, who is also the Chair of the House Committee on Natural Resources, at the committee’s hearing on the act on Wednesday afternoon.

“Many would be shocked to learn that no such standardized response time exists across federal agencies right now,” Tiffany said. “Instead, decisions about initial attack are left up to subjective factors that vary across agencies, regions, and individuals. Aggressive initial attacks are critical to preventing fires from developing into large, uncontrollable blazes that spread devastation.”

United States Forest Service Deputy Chief John Crockett said the Service supports the intent of the law and shares the goal of improving federal response to wildfires as a witness at Wednesday’s hearing. He also said the Service plans to have 11,300 firefighters for the 2026 wildfire season, which some lawmakers worry would be extreme due to low amounts of snowpack across the West.

But the nation’s current wildland fire workforce isn’t strong enough to meet the new 30-minute response standard, according to wildland firefighter advocacy group Grassroots Wildland Firefighters. The group said multiple systemic issues need to first be addressed before Congress sets sweeping response-time mandates.

“Response standards must be grounded in reality—and paired with investments in a sustainable wildfire workforce,” the group said in a social media post. “The biggest constraint in federal wildfire response today isn’t policy—it’s people. Chronic staffing shortages, high vacancy rates, and retention challenges already strain resources during peak fire season. Terrain, remoteness, detection delays, and aviation limitations further complicate rapid response, especially in remote federal lands.”

Click here to read the group’s full response to the proposed legislation.

US Wildland Fire Service launched, despite lack of funding and without majority of nation’s firefighting resources

The United States Department of the Interior on Monday officially announced the launch of the “U.S. Wildland Fire Service,” an effort by the department to unify the wildfire-fighting resources of numerous agencies.

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum first announced the department’s intent to establish the new service in September as a continuation of President Donald Trump’s executive order in June, which directed all agencies represented by the National Interagency Fire Center to enhance their wildland firefighting capabilities. The new Service will consolidate all department sub-agencies’ wildland firefighting forces, including those in the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Service already faces financial and legislative hurdles. A group of both Democratic and Republican lawmakers effectively blocked the service from being funded in a new appropriations bill package. The bills included $0 for the U.S. Wildland Fire Service, despite the Department requesting around $6.5 billion for the agency’s wildland fire operations. The lawmakers also specifically said they don’t agree with the administration’s consolidation efforts in a recent press release.

“The bill does not endorse the consolidation of federal wildland firefighting into one agency as proposed in President Trump’s budget request,” a press release from the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations’ Democratic members said. “Instead, it specifically provides funding to continue wildland firefighting using the longstanding practice of funding both the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to allow Congress to consider legislative proposals for such a major change.”

Monday’s announcement did not mention the funding discrepancy.

The new Service’s name is also a bit of a misnomer, as the vast majority of the nation’s wildland firefighting resources won’t be included in the Service. More than two-thirds of those resources are managed by the United States Forest Service, which will be excluded from the new U.S. Wildland Fire Service. Lawmakers have officially signaled their desire for the Forest Service to eventually become part of the Wildland Fire Service, but such a consolidation would need an act of Congress.

Click here to read the Department of the Interior’s full order announcing the new Service’s establishment.

USFS to standardize post-fire recovery programs, scrutinize current projects

The USDA Forest Service plans to standardize post-fire recovery actions nationwide.

The Service will soon be launching a nationwide environmental assessment to analyze the effects of general post-fire recovery actions, issues, and alternatives to facilitate consistency, officials said in a press release on Thursday. The Service would then standardize its programs across the nation’s forests to allow for a more “rapid, efficient, and effective response” from local managers.

Officials said a review of the agency’s post-fire recovery programs was necessary due to the increasing severity and frequency of wildfires across the country, especially in Western states. It also aligns with executive orders issued by President Donald Trump, which focus on streamlining wildland fire response and increasing timber production through deregulation.

“Restoring forests after a wildfire is not something we can delay, especially when public safety is at stake,” Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz said in a press release. “Post-fire recovery actions need to be immediate and comprehensive to protect the future of our forests and the people who depend on them.” 

The Service’s environmental analysis would specifically focus on the following issues:

  • Effects to wildlife and habitat, including threatened, endangered or sensitive species
  • Effects to waterways and soils resulting from fire suppression and response activities
  • Effects to public access, recreation, and visual quality through temporary closures during hazard treatment
  • Economic effects of post-fire timber salvage

“This effort is about resilience,” Chief Schultz said. “We’re not just recovering from a fire. We’re building landscapes that can withstand the next one.” 

Officials expect the assessment to be completed by April, with site-specific scoping, documentation, and decisions being issued on a project-by-project basis by local rangers. Members of the public can comment on the Service’s proposal through Jan. 26 at 11:59 p.m. EST. Click here to submit a comment on the proposal.

Extreme fire warnings for southern Australian heatwave

Bushfire central Victoria, January 2026. Photo: CFA District 12

Update, 13 January – The searing heatwave across southeastern Australia in early 2026 set the stage for an outbreak of bushfires in Victoria and New South Wales. The heatwave was one of the most intense on record as temperatures soared to 111°F (43.9°C) in Melbourne, Victoria and as high as 109°F (42.8°C) in Sydney, New South Wales. The hottest locations in Victoria included Wudinna, Tarcoola, and Walpeup, which recorded 48.2°C (118.7°F), 48.1°C (118.6°F), and 46.5°C (115.7°F), respectively.

After days of multiple fires at the highest level of Emergency Warning, today only 11 active fires remain, with all under the Watch and Act level or lower. More than 500 structures, including 180 homes, were impacted by the raging fires in Victoria alone as of January 12. One person, a cattle farmer, died in the Longwood fire.

The summer heat and long-term lack of rain has rendered vegetation dry and ready to ignite. By January 11, when the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Aqua satellite acquired this true-color image, many dozens of fires were burning across Victoria (south) and New South Wales (east).

January 11, 2026, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Aqua satellite acquired this true-color image, many dozens of fires were burning across Victoria (south) and New South Wales (east).
This Copernicus Sentinel-2 image, acquired on 9 January 2026, shows the area south of the town of Longwood in northern Victoria. Extensive dark burn scars mark areas already affected by fire, while active fire fronts appear in bright red tones.

The main highway connecting Sydney and Melbourne remains closed where several bushfires rage on the eve of brutal conditions forecast across Victoria for Friday 9 January.

Friday’s fire danger will be the worst across Victoria since Black Summer in 2019-20. Catastrophic and Extreme Fire conditions have been forecast across the state.

The Country Fire Authority’s Greg Murphy was direct in his summary of what the state was facing ahead after already experiences several days of intense heat and wind, with several houses already lost.

“Our job is to help people tomorrow. We might not be able to. That’s difficult to say, but it’s real.”

VicEmergency said that fire and weather conditions forecast on Friday will make bushfires burning in the north-central and northern part of the state extremely dangerous for people who live, work or are holidaying in these areas.

This time of the year is peak summer holiday season across southern Australia with beaches, national parks and forests crowded with holidayers from around Australia.

All national parks in the designated Catastrophic Fire Danger areas will be closed to visitors on Friday – this includes popular destinations in the Grampians, Otways, parts of the Murray and Goulburn Rivers, and many attractions on the Great Ocean Road. Events and holiday programs have been cancelled along with train and bus services in the most extreme regions.

The maximum of 42C (107F) on Wednesday is forecast to be repeated on Friday in Melbourne with high winds, with some regional areas as high as 46C (114F), stretching the limits of any bushfire suppression capabilities, with the high possibility of bands of thunderstorms and dry lighting crossing the state. New South Wales will get the same treatment into Saturday.

For up to date emergency information go to:

https://www.emergency.vic.gov.au/

Bushfire central Victoria, January 2026. Photo: CFA District 12
Bushfire central Victoria, January 2026. Photo: CFA District 12

‘Wildland Fire Service’ consolidation effort stalled pending further study

Night operations on the Pine Gulch Fire in Colorado. Photo by Kyle Miller, Wyoming Hotshots, USFS firefighters hotshots

Congress just unveiled a new package of bills to fund some agencies and avert a full government shutdown at the end of January. The package includes a specific push back against the Trump administration’s attempt to consolidate the nation’s wildland fire resources.

The U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture unveiled plans in 2025 for the formation of the U.S. Wildland Fire Service in September, with the goal of having the Service operational by the end of January. The formation of the new Service followed an executive order issued by President Donald Trump demanding that the nation’s wildfire fighting forces be consolidated under a single agency.

Those efforts appear to have stalled after both Democratic and Republican lawmakers blocked that order and opted to maintain the current wildland firefighting structure in their new funding bills. The bill package continues funding allocations for wildland firefighting services to the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior’s individual agencies.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, in September, announced the “unification” of department sub-agencies’ wildland firefighting forces, including the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, under the U.S. Wildland Fire Service as part of the Wildland Fire Management Program.

But that unification did not include the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, which has more than two-thirds of the nation’s firefighting resources. Lawmakers said such a consequential change would need congressional scrutiny before it’s approved.

“The bill does not endorse the consolidation of federal wildland firefighting into one agency as proposed in President Trump’s budget request,” a press release from the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations’ Democratic members said. “Instead, it specifically provides funding to continue wildland firefighting using the longstanding practice of funding both the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to allow Congress to consider legislative proposals for such a major change.”

The Committee also directed Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to contract with an independent and non-partisan research organization to conduct a study to find out how feasible Trump’s proposed consolidation of wildland fire management operations is. The study would specifically focus on the effects on timber targets, cohesion between wildland fire management and hazardous fuel reduction programs, and how the new Service would differ from the National Interagency Fire Center.

Long-term health scars left by LA’s historic wildfires

The fires have been long extinguished, but the health effects of Los Angeles’ destructive 2025 wildfires are still living on one year later.

The Palisades, Eaton, Hurst, Kenneth, Hughes and Sepulveda fires killed 440 people, destroyed nearly 16,000 homes, and burned more than 55,000 acres of land from Jan. 7 through February. The Palisades Fire alone caused an estimated $51.7 billion worth of home damage, according to a July analysis from Redfin.

LA residents are dealing with not just the emotional toll of the tragedy on its anniversary, but the physical toll as well, according to health experts from the University of California, Los Angeles. Residents’ lungs, in particular, face ongoing health challenges.

“Many individuals who followed up with me six months later also mentioned their symptoms flared with the fires,” UCLA Health pulmonologist and associate clinical professor May-Lin Wilgus said in a recent article posted by the university. “These patients often had continued exposures — such as returning to smoke-damaged homes or encountering high levels of heavy-metal contamination — so it does seem to be a trigger.”

A study published in December by LA’s Smidt Heart Institute and other researchers found that more severe forms of illness presented early in some susceptible LA residents, including excess emergency encounters for not only pulmonary illness and acute myocardial infarction. But, less severe effects have persisted or started to present with delayed timing, including increased systemic illness through blood chemistry laboratory abnormalities.

“Systemic health effects are not often reported in post wildfire outcomes studies, perhaps because they are not easily detected or because they are associated more with WUI than wildland-only fire exposures,” the research said. “Indeed, the smoke produced by WUI compared with wildland-only fires is known to contain not only a more complex aggregate of volatile and semi-volatile chemical constituents but also toxic metals, which may alter the epigenetic profiles of immune cells with broad tissue distribution in exposed individuals.”

Dr. Wilgus advised communities to start preparing for the next major wildfire now to lessen future adverse health effects, including using high-quality air filters, creating evacuation plans, and storing an emergency go-bag with food, water and medications.

“We have a very wide network of pulmonology clinics throughout the region, where we are treating patients who may have been affected,” Dr. Wilgus said. “Throughout Los Angeles, we need to be more aware and prepared, as well as support ongoing research to help reduce these impacts.”

LA Fires: What have we learnt from the research?

Idaho Taskforce 4 experiencing southern California traffic en route to the Palisades fire on Saturday, Jan. 11. Photo Kelly Martin

In the year that has passed since the deadly Los Angeles fires many have sought to make sense of what happened and why, and questioned could it happen again, somewhere in the world. This is a week that will recall painful memories for those close to the LA fires.

As a mid-summer heatwave moves across southern Australia this week, fire fighters are facing multiple fire outbreaks. Natural Hazards Research Australia CEO Andrew Gissing looks at what the research into the LA fires is telling other fire-prone communities, in Australia and elsewhere.

The two fires that broke out on 7 January 2025, killed more than 30 people and destroyed over 17,000 homes and buildings in Los Angeles County. The Palisades Fire scorched LA’s coastal Pacific Palisades neighborhood. The Eaton Fire razed the town of Altadena northeast of LA. This photo gallery by the Associated Press shows the progress in rebuilding these communities.

By Andrew Gissing

The devastating Los Angeles fires in the very heart of a built-up urban interface sparked global interest, including in Australia as communities, media and governments asked how the fires happened and could such a catastrophe happen here.

One year on from the fires researchers have focused on understanding the causes and impacts of the fires as well as evaluating vulnerabilities and resilience features that contributed to the patterns of destruction and the efficacy of emergency management.

Causes and impacts

Despite occurring during the winter months that typically see less wildfires, extremely dry conditions, combined with strong winds (reaching almost 160 km/h) created hazardous fire conditions. Dozens of fires ignited in early January 2025, two of which grew to become the Palisades and Eaton Fires which spread through adjacent suburbs.

The fires burned 37 000 acres and destroyed more than16 000 structures, driven by intense house-to-house fire spread, known as conflagration. According to Swiss Re, the fires were the costliest wildfire event ever globally with insurance losses estimated at $40 billion. Some sixteen times greater than Australia’s Black Summer Bushfires.

US building codes relating to the wildfire urban interface became operational in 2008, however, much of the building stock destroyed was built before then which meant wildfire resilience measures were not uniformly adopted.

Rapid urban growth has also increased wildfire exposure across the United States, with a study concluding that exposure grew 40% between 1990 and 2010.

Deaths were reported at 31, however, research found 440 indirect deaths linked to the fires from factors such as poor air quality, stress, disruption to health systems and mental health impacts. A further study found a 46% increase in visits for heart attacks to a Los Angeles hospital in the first 90 days following the fires when compared to the same period over the previous seven years.

Built environment vulnerabilities and resilience

Investigations led by the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IIBHS) determined key factors that contributed to the loss of structures were lack of structure separation, connective fuels and building materials used, concluding that:

  • Each additional 10 ft (3 m) of separation between structures increased the likelihood of no damage by 7-13%, up to 30ft no matter the structure type, After 30 ft, the impact of additional separation flattened off.
  • Vegetation and other flammable materials and household items adjacent to buildings such as decks, garbage bins, hot tubs and pergolas acted as connective fuels, creating significant vulnerability to structures.
  • Vegetation growing alongside non-combustible fences compromised its resilience. Where there was 25% fuel coverage in the 1.2 m directly surrounding a structure there was an 87% to 100% chance of damage or destruction.
  • Most structures inspected included at least one resilient building feature. However, few had adopted a comprehensive resilient system allowing flames, radiant heat and embers to exploit building vulnerabilities.
  • Often resilient characteristics, such as non-combustible exterior wall cladding were paired with vulnerable ones such as windows, doors, vents or eaves increasing the overall vulnerability of the structure.
  • Structures with four resilient components were 54% more likely to experience no damage regardless of separation distance, this reduced to 36% likelihood of no damage with only one or two resilient components.

A recent Berkeley Fire Research Lab study analysing data from five of the most destructive Californian fires before 2022 identified similar results suggesting that home retrofitting and defensible space can double the number of homes and other structures that survive a wildfire. Notably, the study found that removing all combustible material within 1.2 m of homes could reduce structure losses by 17%, compared with 5% for retrofitting alone.

The study also found that separation distance between structures is the most influential factor driving structure loss, especially in densely built areas.

Resilience implications

Research overwhelmingly found a systematic approach to wildfire resilience is key, underscoring that no single resilience measure is sufficient on its own.

At the household level, a combination of resilience measures including building codes, retrofitting, adequate structure separation and the removal of connective fuels has been proven to have the greatest impact on reducing risk. The IIBHS conclude that when resilience measures are adopted on a neighbourhood-wide scale the number of structure ignitions can be reduced, slowing fire spread and reducing impacts.

Much debate following the fires has centred around new Californian regulations to limit flammable materials within 1.2 m (5 ft) of homes, known as Zone 0, to create an ember-resistant area to prevent structure ignition. According to CAL FIRE the purpose of Zone 0 is to:

Reduce the likelihood of structure ignition by reducing the potential for direct ignition of the structure from flame contact, by embers that accumulate at the base of a wall, and/or indirect ignitions when embers ignite vegetation, vegetative debris or other combustible materials located close to the structure that result in either a radiant heat and/or direct flame contact.

Originally directed by the Legislature in 2020, the impending legislation stalled until the 2025 fires, when the Californian Governor directed the completion of the Zone 0 regulation by the end of 2025. Public debate over the issue has since pushed expected completion to 2026. Despite this, some Californian cities have already implemented Zone 0 policies, with some offering grant programs to support implementation.

The new regulation will build upon existing defendable space policies dating back to 1965, which mandated a fuel reduced area extending to 10 m surrounding a property, and which were supplemented in 2008 with a requirement for fuel reduction to around 30 m or to the edge of the property. These regulations include maintenance of grass, space between vegetation, removal of fallen leaves and clearance space around sheds and wood plies. The key difference is that in Zone 0 there should be no fuel, while in the outer areas, fuel is to be minimised and managed.

It is proposed Zone 0 will apply to all new construction in California’s State Responsibility Area. For existing structures home and business owners will have three years to clear the vegetation and other combustibles within 1.2 m around the structure. CAL FIRE has estimated that 17% of all structures (some 2 million houses) across California will be affected by the regulations.

Regulations are proposed to include combustibles such as wood-based mulch, woody plants, dry grass, synthetic lawns, stored timber, storage sheds, wooden gates and fences attached to a structure, small trees and other landscape materials within the first 1.2 m of the structure and any attached decks. Trees would be allowed within the zone if they are pruned and maintained appropriately.

A recent UCLA expert panel debate noted that while combustible materials near structures pose clear fire risks, vegetation management is more complex. Reducing tree canopy may contribute to extreme heat exposure, and communities have resisted vegetation removal due to aesthetics and cost, framed in the media as ‘anti-garden policy’. Some residents argue well-watered plants in Zone 0 offer protection, but recent IIBHS research confirms even hydrated vegetation will ignite under extreme fire conditions.

Observations for Australia

Australian experience has seen significant bushfire losses within urban areas. For example, in 1967 fires burned to within 2 km of Hobart CBD claiming 62 lives and in 2003 fires burned into Canberra suburbs destroying close to 500 homes.

Similar to California, many Australian properties were not designed to withstand bushfires, and the number of homes in at-risk areas continues to increase. The risk of conflagrations in Australia compared to California, however, must be better understood. The two environments are different and significant risk factors such as structure separation may differ.

Natural Hazards Research Australia funded research led by UTAS investigating the wildfire urban interface found that creating defensible space around a home can reduce house losses. Finding that guidelines for the creation of defensible space should identify the closest area surrounding a home as a stand-alone zone (similar to Zone 0), to ensure focus on this critical area.

A systems approach to household resilience requires clear, evidence-based measures that prioritise efficacy and efficiency. While guidelines exist to address existing buildings, their implementation remains largely voluntary, highlighting the need for incentives to encourage adoption. Fire agencies play a crucial role to communicate these measures, but systemic change is essential to ensure widespread resilience.

To help remove barriers to improving the resilience of Australia’s building stock the Productivity Commission recently recommended the development of a nationally consistent climate resilience rating system for housing and for a national strategy to improve the resilience of Australia’s housing stock over coming decades.

In its submission to the Productivity Commission inquiry on net zero transformation, the Centre noted that a resilience rating system could be mandatory for all new properties at the time a property was sold or leased. For example, California now requires sellers in areas of high wildfire risk to report completed retrofit works. Such rating systems should consider both physical attributes of a structure and features surrounding a structure such as garden design.

Transparency of household resilience alone, however, will unlikely be insufficient to overcome barriers to improving the resilience of existing housing stock. Incentive measures such as subsidies, low-interest loans, insurance discounts and build back better provisions in insurance policies should all be considered.

Natural Hazards Research Australia is continuing to support Australian fire services to explore implications of the Los Angeles fires through new research focused on understanding the risk of conflagration in Australia.

In short, Australia needs:

  • Incentive measures such as subsidies, low-interest loans, insurance discounts to promote retrofitting to enhance property resilience.
  • National Resilience Strategy for housing stock inclusive of the management of bushfire fuel on private land
  • Resilience rating system, mandatory for all new properties and when properties are sold or leased