InDaily

Adelaide's independent news

Support

Target would-be arsonists to cut bushfire risk

Opinion

By malice or accident, humans ignite the vast majority of bushfires. With many arsonists primed by known factors, it’s time authorities nationally seriously addressed identifying and targeting potential would-be offenders so as to prevent more destruction, argues Janet Stanley.

Print article

It’s hard to comprehend why someone would deliberately light a bushfire.

Yet this behaviour regularly occurs in Australia and other countries.

We would go a long way to preventing bushfires if we better understood this troubling phenomenon.

Experts estimate about 85% of bushfires are caused by humans. A person may accidentally or carelessly start a fire, such as leaving a campfire unattended or using machinery which creates sparks. Or a person could maliciously light a fire.

This criminal behaviour is not widely recognised or understood by the public, fire authorities or researchers.

This means opportunities to prevent bushfires are generally being missed and resources devoted to tackling the cause are far from commensurate with the devastating consequences.

The 2013 fire at Wallan, Victoria, was thought to be deliberately lit.
MARK DADSWELL/AAP

Profile of an arsonist

Research has shown about 8% of officially recorded vegetation fires were attributed to malicious lighting, and another 22% as suspicious.

However, about 40% of officially recorded vegetation fires did not have an assigned cause. When unassigned bushfires were investigated by fire investigators, the majority were found to be maliciously lit.

But official fires are just the tip of the iceberg: the actual number of bushfires in Australia is thought to be about five times that recorded.

Virtually none of these unrecorded fires are investigated.

Young men comprise the largest group of people who maliciously light fires. These youth are usually troubled, likely to have absent fathers and little home supervision. They are likely to have experienced child abuse and neglect and associated with an antisocial peer group.

Lighting fires may give a feeling of excitement, defiance and power, or it may be an expression of displaced anger. Some offenders have an intellectual disability.

Offenders may make no attempt to extinguish the fire, and give little consideration to the consequences. Some may have no feelings of remorse or fear of punishment. Others may never have intended to create such wide devastation.

Older males who light malicious fires also have a history of social and educational disadvantage, poor family functioning in childhood, low self-esteem, and often a pathological interest in fire. However the older the person gets, the less likely they are to light fires.

Convicted Black Saturday arsonist Brendan James Sokaluk arriving at the Supreme Court in Melbourne.
Julian Smith/AAP

So why don’t we talk about arson?

During last week’s east-coast bushfire crisis, a handful of news reports covered people lighting fires. They include a teenager who allegedly lit a Queensland bushfire that razed 14 homes, and a man charged with starting a Sydney fire by letting off fireworks.

Media attention on a fire’s cause is generally scant and the public rarely hears much beyond initial charges being laid. This is in stark contrast to blanket news coverage of the consequences of bushfires.

A staggeringly low apprehension and conviction rate for offenders – less than 1% – is a further barrier to public awareness of the problem. Conviction rarely leads to a substantial punishment.

Fire brigades in most states offer a limited education course for some children who light fires, usually led by volunteers. But there are few targeted treatment programs for those who light bushfires.

Firefighters near Sydney in November 2019 conducting controlled burning – a common fire mitigation method.
Jeremy Piper/AAP

Rethinking the bushfire problem

Rather than tackling the cause of the problem, the major response to bushfire in Australia is mitigation. This largely involves one blunt approach: hazard reduction burns to reduce bushfire fuel loads.

This is an increasingly difficult task as climate change makes weather conditions more unsuitable for controlled burns.

This business-as-usual approach has not halted the upward trajectory of bushfire ignitions.

A much greater focus on prevention would require a significant rethinking of the bushfire problem. This would include collaboration between government, business, non-government organisations, communities and others.

Victoria’s Gippsland Arson Prevention Program provides a promising model. Through public education, media engagement and other means, it informs communities on how to help prevent arson. The committee includes Victoria Police, government and fire authorities and local power generators.

In one example of an on-the-ground response, local authorities organised the removal of dumped cars, which are commonly seen by bored and troubled youth as an invitation to start a fire.

Arson prevention also includes addressing long-term problems such as youth disadvantage and unemployment, especially in rural-urban fringe areas where most human-lit fires occur.

Shorter-term approaches include providing support and treatment to at-risk youth, and situational crime prevention such as good lighting and cameras in places vulnerable to fire lighting.

We must open up a society-wide discussion of bushfire prevention, which includes listening to local communities about what they value and what can be done about the problem.

As climate change worsens – and bushfires along with it – a radical rethink is required.

Janet Stanley is Associate professor/Principal Research Fellow, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.

We value local independent journalism. We hope you do too.

InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.

Powered by PressPatron

More Opinion stories

Loading next article

Subscribe to InDaily – it’s free!

South Australia’s locally owned, independent source of digital news.

Subscribe now and go in the monthly draw* for your chance to WIN a $100 Foodland voucher!

Subscribe free here

*Terms and conditions apply

Welcome back!

Did you know it’s FREE to subscribe?

Subscribe now and go in the monthly draw* for your chance to WIN a $100 voucher!

Subscribe

*Terms and conditions apply