Fire danger rating confusion: 93 per cent of Australians don’t understand it

A survey of 5430 Australians has led to calls for a simplified fire danger rating system. See what’s been proposed.

The community-preferred fire danger rating system has four simplified levels.

THE first major survey of Australians’ understanding of the national fire danger index has shown it has well and truly failed to work.

Of the 5430 Australians surveyed, across every state, 93 per cent failed to understand how the nation’s complex fire-danger rating system works, leading to calls for it to be simplified.

“Most recognise the fire danger rating system, but many don’t understand it”, the survey conducted by South Australian Country Fire Service found.

While the current semicircular six-color-coded fire danger index measures how dangerous a fire would become if started on that day, 93 per cent of respondents thought it predicted the probability of a fire starting.

“Participants almost universally described the fire danger ratings as a forecast of how likely a fire is to occur, rather than how dangerous a fire would be should one start,” the survey team reported.

“This causes many to confuse the system with a warning system, with many believing the highest level indicates that a fire has started.”

It’s a fundamental failure, given the risk to all Australians who live or holiday in bushfire prone regions.

“It was (also) found that while the signage is recognised, most are not using the system and the majority have never taken action relating to it,” the team reported.

“There is confusion over what to do when, and it was found that few people would take action below the ‘Severe’ rating.”

Yet under the current system a severe rating means: “you must be physically and mentally prepared to defend in these conditions” and “if you are not prepared, leaving bushfire prone areas early in the day is your safest option”.

That confusion led the majority of survey respondents to call for a simplified index, with one Queenslander from Mackay stating: “if you have too many(colours), that’s when people lose interest and go oh there’s too much going on, who cares”.

Another NSW Dungog respondent said “there’s too many levels, especially to get out a quick message on a road sign. People want to know if they can do something or not.”

More than half the respondents called for a simplified four-color-coded danger level index, based on the well recognised colours of a traffic lights:

LOW (green) – Prepare so you know what to do if a fire starts

MODERATE (yellow)- Be ready to act

HIGH (amber) – Take action

EXTREME – Leave high risk areas

“It needs to be really simple,” one Bundaberg resident responded. “Even a five year old can learn three levels, they understand traffic lights.”

The SA CFS was commissioned to conduct the survey by the Australian Fire Danger Rating System project steering group, which includes representatives of all state fire and emergency services, the BOM and the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council.