Live trial performance of the Australian Fire Danger Rating System - Research Prototype

被引:5
|
作者
Grootemaat, S. [1 ,3 ]
Matthews, S. [1 ,4 ]
Kenny, B. J. [1 ,5 ]
Runcie, J. W. [1 ]
Hollis, J. J. [1 ,6 ]
Sauvage, S. [2 ]
Fox-Hughes, P. [2 ]
Holmes, A. [1 ]
机构
[1] New South Wales Rural Fire Serv, 4 Murray Rose Ave, Sydney Olymp Pk, NSW 2127, Australia
[2] Bur Meteorol, Res Program, 7-111 Macquarie St, Hobart, Tas 7000, Australia
[3] NSW Natl Pk & Wildlife Serv, 4PS,12 Darcy St, Parramatta, NSW 2150, Australia
[4] Nova Syst, 100 William St, Woolloomooloo, NSW 2011, Australia
[5] Nat Conservat Council NSW, Sydney, NSW 2010, Australia
[6] Dept Biodivers Conservat & Attract, Brain St, Manjimup, WA 6258, Australia
关键词
bushfire risk; fire behaviour; fire behaviour models; fire danger forecast; fire management; forecast system; fuel types; system evaluation; INITIAL-ATTACK; EXPERT-JUDGMENT; MODEL; PRODUCTIVITY; SUPPRESSION; INTEGRATION; VARIABLES; BEHAVIOR; INDEXES; FOREST;
D O I
10.1071/WF23143
中图分类号
S7 [林业];
学科分类号
0829 ; 0907 ;
摘要
Background. The Australian Fire Danger Rating System program (AFDRS) has built a new fire danger rating system for Australia. A live trial of the system's Research Prototype (AFDRSRP), based on fire behaviour thresholds, was run and evaluated between October 2017 and March 2018. Aims. Live trial results are critically analysed, and knowledge gaps and recommendations for future work discussed. Methods. Australian bushfire experts assessed wildfires and prescribed burns across a range of vegetation types and weather conditions. Forecast fire danger ratings calculated using: (1) AFDRSRP; and (2) Forest Fire Danger Index (FFDI) and Grassland Fire Danger Index (GFDI) were compared against ratings derived by expert opinion for each evaluation fire (n = 336). Key results. Overall performance of AFDRSRP was superior to the FFDI/GFDI system (56 vs 43% correct), with a tendency to over-predict rather than under-predict fire potential. AFDRSRP also demonstrated its value to assess fire danger in fuel types not conforming to current grassland or forest models; e.g. for fuels that were grouped to use mallee-heath, spinifex and shrubland fire spread models. Conclusions. The AFDRSRP live trial was successful, outperforming the existing operational fire danger system. Implications Identified improvements would further enhance AFDRSRP performance, ensuring readiness for operational implementation.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] FUEL MODELS IN NATIONAL FIRE-DANGER RATING SYSTEM
    DEEMING, JE
    BROWN, JK
    JOURNAL OF FORESTRY, 1975, 73 (06) : 347 - 350
  • [22] Indonesia Fire Danger Rating System (InaFDRS), a New Algorithm for the Fire Prevention in Indonesia
    Sanjaya, Hartanto
    Suryono, G. Fajar
    Eugenie, Azalea
    Putri, Mega Novetrishka
    Frederik, Marina C. G.
    Agustan, Agustan
    Bintoro, Oni Bibin
    Sadmono, Heri
    2019 2ND IEEE ASIA-PACIFIC CONFERENCE ON GEOSCIENCE, ELECTRONICS AND REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY (AGERS): UNDERSTANDING AND FORECASTING THE DYNAMICS OF LAND, OCEAN AND MARITIME, 2019, : 1 - 5
  • [23] cffdrs: an R package for the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System
    Xianli Wang
    B. Mike Wotton
    Alan S. Cantin
    Marc-André Parisien
    Kerry Anderson
    Brett Moore
    Mike D. Flannigan
    Ecological Processes, 6
  • [24] Development and Application of a Forest Fire Danger Rating System in South Korea
    Won, Myoung Soo
    Lee, Si Young
    Lee, Myung Bo
    Ohga, Shoji
    JOURNAL OF THE FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE KYUSHU UNIVERSITY, 2010, 55 (02): : 221 - 229
  • [25] cffdrs: an R package for the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System
    Wang, Xianli
    Wotton, B. Mike
    Cantin, Alan S.
    Parisien, Marc-Andre
    Anderson, Kerry
    Moore, Brett
    Flannigan, Mike D.
    ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2017, 6
  • [26] 1988 REVISIONS TO THE 1978 NATIONAL FIRE-DANGER RATING SYSTEM
    BURGAN, RE
    USDA FOREST SERVICE SOUTHEASTERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION RESEARCH PAPER, 1988, (SE-273): : 1 - 39
  • [28] A comparison of the US National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) with recorded fire occurrence and final fire size
    Walding, Nicholas G.
    Williams, Hywel T. P.
    McGarvie, Scott
    Belcher, Claire M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDLAND FIRE, 2018, 27 (02) : 99 - 113
  • [29] Correction to cffdrs: an R package for the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System
    Xianli Wang
    B. Mike Wotton
    Alan S. Cantin
    Marc-André Parisien
    Kerry Anderson
    Brett Moore
    Mike D. Flannigan
    Ecological Processes, 7
  • [30] Combining NDVI and surface temperature for the estimation of live fuel moisture content in forest fire danger rating
    Chuvieco, E
    Cocero, D
    Riaño, D
    Martin, P
    Martínez-Vega, J
    de la Riva, J
    Pérez, F
    REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT, 2004, 92 (03) : 322 - 331