Introduction

According to the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience, “bushfires are a natural, essential, and complex part of the Australian environment, and have been for thousands of years,” to stimulate new growth in their aftermath. But when do “fires [that] scorched more than 24 million hectares, killed 33 people directly, and caused almost 450 more to lose their lives from smoke inhalation” reveal that this natural phenomenon has become unnatural? The data that began our interest was on Australian fires during the summer of 2019-2020, also known as Black Summer (the fires described above). This dataset comes from two original sources, MODIS and VIIRS, NASA satellite instruments used for fire detection in real-time. Based on the dataset, we began our analysis of the history leading up to this catastrophe, including worsening climate change and decreasing Indigenous fire management practices.

Effects of Australian Bushfires on Wildlife and Biodiversity

Researchers agree that Australian bushfires have significant effects on wildlife and biodiversity. Dunstan et al. (2021) performs a clinical assessment of Black Summer fires on Kangaroo Island and Southern Australia. These authors focus on rescued Koala bears, who experienced wildfire effects including severe burns, poor body condition, and dehydration. Next, Murphy et al. (2022) builds on this idea of profound impact. The resource dives into the effects on Melbourne’s food system, which faces increasing vulnerabilities as climate-related shocks become more frequent. Abram et al. (2021) explains that the Black Summer fires were unprecedented, pointing to their significance. Additionally, the paper warns that fire risk will rapidly increase in future years, due to climate change. These issues all speak to the varied impacts of Australian fires on wildlife, biodiversity, and local communities.

Strategies for Fire Management Practices

Multiple sources argue that fire management should take into account regional differences. Bradstock (2010), for example, describes distinct biogeographic areas in Australia and discusses the importance of these differences in analyzing fire frequency. Factors such as moisture levels and tree cover areas are highly influential, and should be considered when making recommendations for fire management practices. Bowman (2013) agrees, explaining that regional biodiversity comes with associated fire risks. Australia has different types of forests in its northern and southern areas. In some places, prescribed burning (starting controlled burns with the aim of reducing future fire frequency and severity) might cause greater carbon emissions that fire suppression on a case-by-case basis. Some parts of Australia, however, might “biome shift” if left to burn, meaning their entire ecosystems could become different over time. This is partially due to climate change, which will only worsen fire frequency and severity in Australia (and globally).

Indigenous Fire Management Practices

Researchers have compared land in Australia before and after British colonization. Adeleye et al. (2022) demonstrates that there has been a “major ecological shift” in Cape Pillar, southeast Tasmania, due to European colonization and the removal of Indigenous people. Mariani et al. (2023) also sheds light on this phenomenon, explaining that, before colonial invasion, much of the region had little tree cover. Bird et al. (2024) explains that Indigenous fire management practices included controlled burns that reduced uncontrolled wildfire, and increased biodiversity and vegetation in Australia. Indigenous perspectives are highlighted in the work of Edwards et al. (2016), Petty et al. (2015), and Williamson et al. (2020), who argue that although Indigenous people were some of the most greatly affected by Australian wildfires, they have been largely ignored by government response. Furthermore, they argue that Indigenous people have been shut out of land access and control and fire management. While much current literature agrees that this is a problem, they disagree on the solution. Bowman et al. (2013), for example, argues that parts of Australia today should use fire suppression, not controlled burns, based on their current land type. The idea that fire suppression is the optimal strategy continues to shut out Indigenous knowledge from fire management. On the other hand, perhaps Indigenous practices would be less effective on Australia’s current land, which has suffered from uncontrolled burns for years. This literature takes a largely historical and scientific approach, raising questions about what the next steps should be.