1

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning

Phase Three Engagement Summary

Background

The Hume region Strategic Bushfire Management Planning (SBMP) process has been informed by fire agencies (including Forest Fire Management Victoria and CFA), Local Government and Emergency Management Victoria.

We have built on the extensive knowledge and experience that exists within bushfire management agencies and communities. Our engagement activities are creating conversations with key community members and other stakeholders which is helping us understand how we can all work together to improve bushfire management, regardless of land tenure. The development of the Hume Strategic Bushfire Management Plan, which covers the entire area of North East Victoria (refer to Hume boundary in Figure 2), complements Municipal Strategic Fire Management Plans.

The purpose of this final survey was to obtain feedback on the proposed strategic fuel management plan for Hume, including the values and objectives for bushfire management, the proposed Fire Management Zones (FMZ) and the proposed Priority Fuel Management Areas (PFMAs). In addition, to comment on the proposed strategy people were asked for their opinions on the engagement process and where they would like future efforts to be focussed.

This document provides a summary of the community feedback received from the final phase of online consultation which was conducted via the Engage Victoria website. The development of this plan also considered input from the Hume Strategic Bushfire Advisory Reference Group (SBARG) and partner agencies.

The summary of the feedback received for Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 2a online consultations can be found on Engage Victoria at https://engage.vic.gov.au/bushfire-planning

Engagement Process This was the final planned opportunity for the community to provide online feedback about elements of the Hume SBMP process, using the Engage Victoria website.

To further help us understand community views and other stakeholders, a SBARG was formed, which includes apiarists, vignerons land managers and other members of the community. We will also be seeking the views of municipalities via their Municipal Fire Management Planning Committees.

We understand that some communities and groups of people are more vulnerable to bushfire than others, including those who lack experience with bushfires, summer visitors, people with disabilities or illness, the elderly, and people from non-English speaking backgrounds. There is also an understanding that some places are more at risk of bushfire than others. The process of strategic planning will guide our responses to bushfire risk to ensure that the places, communities and assets most at risk of bushfire are prioritised for mitigation and management.

We respect and acknowledge that communities consist of individuals who have their own specific experiences and personal opinions that can be drawn upon to seek guidance for future strategic bushfire management planning.

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

2

Promotion and participation

The Engage Victoria survey was promoted on social media sites including Facebook and shared by partner agencies involved in the planning process such as DELWP, CFA, Parks Victoria, EMV and Local Government. An email link was sent to community groups and individuals with an interest in bushfire management who had provided their details to agencies for this purpose. 62 individuals completed the survey, with 30% of respondents who indicated they had participated in previous strategic bushfire planning consultations (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Methods by which respondents were informed about the Phase Three consultation.

2

2

4

4

4

4

9

16

23

30

35

0 10 20 30 40

Other

Flyer/postcard

Advertising

Word of mouth

Regional media – newspaper or radio

Agency staff member

Social media

Agency website (DELWP, CFA, Safer Together orlocal government)

Email

Participated in previous consultations

MyCFA email

% total responses received: methods by which respondents where informed bythe survey

3

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Participant location

The survey for phase three was completed by 62 people, 77% who indicated that they reside within Hume region (Question 12). Almost half of total respondents said that they had past bushfire experience with 35% trained as an emergency services volunteer (Question 12).

Participants had the option of providing their postcode when they completed the survey, to determine what issues are most important to given areas. The red dots on the postcode map in Figure 2 show where the main clusters of responses originate from.

Figure 2. Graph of survey respondents based on the postcodes given. Red and yellow dots represent the most frequent postcodes received. Dots shaded in grey show up to two responses from a postcode.

1 - 2

3 - 7

8

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

4

Feedback on Strategy Options (Q1)

The first question of the survey (see Appendix 1) asked respondents how they felt about the proposed fuel management strategy. 76% of respondents either ‘liked’ or ‘could live with’ with the strategy, compared with 24% who indicated that they didn’t like the strategy (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Responses regarding the preferred fuel management strategies of the participants.

Why respondents liked/did not like about the proposed strategy (Q2).

Question two asked respondents why they either liked or disliked the strategy in the previous question (Question 1). For those who indicated that they either ‘liked’ or ‘could live with’ the strategy (76%), the largest block of respondents stated that it was because the proposed strategy was ‘well balanced’ (21%) or achievable (13%) (Figure 4a).

For the 24% of respondents who indicated that they didn’t like the strategy, the main reasons given cited environmental concerns (11%), increased ‘burning’ (9%), or requested ‘less burning’ or ‘alternatives to burning’ (7%) (Figure 4b).

45

31

24

0

10

20

30

40

50

I like this strategy I can live with this strategy I dislike this strategy

% T

OTA

RES

PON

SES

5

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Figure 4 (a). The key factors that influenced strategy choice for those respondents who indicated that they either ‘liked’ or ‘could live with’ the proposed strategy.

2

2

4

4

7

7

7

7

11

13

21

0 5 10 15 20 25

Commented that the result is too 'science based'

Difficulty to locate respondents exact location onthe map

Expressed concerns over 'DELWP's capacity todeliver' the strategy

Happy with strategy but mentioned the need toinclude 'alternate controls to burning'

Happy due to the amount of public consultationand following the stages of consultation to see…

Chose due to 'human safety' being the key factor

Happy but requested 'more maintenance' toreduce the risk of bushfires

Happy but wanted increased fuel management

Happy with the plan

Reasonable and acheivable

Well balanced (human life/assests theenvironment)

% of total responses

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

6

Figure 4 (b). The key factors that influenced strategy choice for those respondents who indicated that they did not like the proposed strategy.

Key elements of the fuel management strategy influencing decision making (Q3).

Question three gave respondents an opportunity to nominate the key elements of the fuel management strategy that influenced their decision making. The most selected element was ‘Public land Fire Management Zoning’ (44%), followed by the ‘Objectives’ (26%), as determined from Phase 1 consultation round (Figure 5).

4

4

4

4

4

4

7

9

11

0 5 10 15

Expressed concerns over 'DELWP's capacity todeliver' the strategy

Felt 'more science/research' was needed tosupport the strategy

Indicated did not support fuel management ontheir own land

Cited smoke concerns

Cited 'human safety' as the the key factor

Felt they didn'd have enough information/couldn'tread the maps/didn't understand

Requested 'less burning' or 'alteratives to burning'

Requested 'increased burning'

Cited 'environmental concerns'

% of total responses

7

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Figure 5. Key elements of the strategy that influenced the decision-making process for Question 1.

Likelihood of respondents to reduce bushfire fuels on their own property (Q4) or be involved with fuel management activities in their area (Q5).

Having considered the new fuel management strategy and the Priority Fuel Management Areas (PFMAs), question four requested feedback on how likely respondents would be to reduce bushfire fuels on their own property. A large percentage of respondents did not answer this question (35%) or said they did not have fuels on their property (23%). For those who did answer this question, 22% said they would be ‘likely’ (15%) or ‘reasonably likely’ (7%) to manage bushfire fuels, compared to 20% who would indicated they would be ‘unlikely’ (15%) to ‘very unlikely’ (5%) to manage bushfire fuels on their property (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Likelihood of respondents to reduce bushfire fuels on their own property having considered the new fuel management strategy and PFMA area.

5

31

18

26

44

0 10 20 30 40 50

Didn't answer

Other

Public land Fire ManagementZoning

Objectives

Public land Fire ManagementZoning

% of total responses

3

5

7

15

15

23

35

0 10 20 30 40

Didn't answer

Very unlikely

Reasonably likely

Unlikely

Likely

I have no fuels on my property

Didn't answer

% of total responses

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

8

Question five asked respondents of their willingness to be involved in future fuel management activities in their local area. 83% of the total responses received indicated that they would either be ‘very likely’ (42%), ‘reasonably likely’ (33%) or ‘likely’ (8%) to be involved, compared to 17% who said they would be either ‘unlikely’ (10%) or ‘very unlikely’ (7%) (Figure 6).

Figure 7. Likelihood of respondents to be involved with fuel management activities in their local area, in conjunction with fire management agencies, local government and the broader community.

Feedback on previous engagement opportunities related to the strategic planning process (Q6 & Q7).

The results from question six indicated that almost half of the total survey respondents had not been involved in previous engagement opportunities related to the strategic planning process (Figure 8a). From those that were involved, 77% participated via the online Engage Victoria platform and/or 26% via face-to-face conversations and workshops (Figure 8a). 75% of respondents with previous engagement participation said that they felt their feedback was either ‘well considered’ (32%), ‘considered a great extent’ (2%), ‘moderately’ (23%), or ‘somewhat’ considered (18%), compared with 11% of total respondents who thought their feedback was not well considered at all (Figure 8b).

8

33

10

42

7

3

0 10 20 30 40 50

Likely

Reasonablylikely

Unlikely

Very likely

Very unlikely

Didn't answer

% of total responses

9

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Figure 8a. Respondent involvement in previous engagement opportunities. Note that respondents could answer multiple categories.

Figure 8b. For respondents who had been involved in previous engagement opportunities as shown in Figure 8a, indicating how well they thought their feedback considered.

48

29

29

19

16

10

0 20 40 60

I was not involved in any otherengagement opportunities

Engage Victoria Phase 1 – objectives

Engage Victoria Phase 2 – strategy options

Engage Victoria Phase 2a - PriorityFuel Management Areas

Meetings with a group you’re involved with

In-person workshops

% total responses

32

11

18

23

2

15

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Didn't respond

Not considered at all

Somewhat considered

Moderately considered

Considered a great extent

Well considered

% of total responses

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

10

Feedback on the consultation process throughout the strategic bushfire management planning process (Q8).

Question eight sought feedback on consultation improvements throughout the planning process. Respondents could select multiple options from eight suggested categories, the highest category selected being ‘provide more face-to-face engagement opportunities’ (Figure 10). ‘Other’ suggestions to those listed in Figure 10, were to make future consultation periods longer and less rushed to encourage greater participation (3 responses). Another suggestion was to have more extensive cost analysis and environmental impact studies to better inform the strategic fuel management decision making process (2 responses).

Figure 10. Feedback on improvements to the strategic planning consultation process. Note that multiple answers were allowed for this question.

Respondent confidence in the overall fuel management strategy process (Q9) and explanation (Q10).

Seventy-eight percent of total respondents had a degree of confidence in the overall process used to create the fuel management strategy (Question 9), ranging from ‘Very’ (6%), ‘Moderately’ (24%), ‘Fairly’ (35%) and ‘Slightly’ confident (Figure 11). Explanations as to why this answer was chosen include:

• Engagement/consultation was good/well thought out with ‘industry experts and community members and including the public in determining the final strategy means that they have a sense of ownership rather than the plan being passed down 'from above'.

• Good science was adopted. • The people behind the plan can be trusted to make good decisions. • Sensible strategy for a ‘sustainable and proactive approach to a well-known problem for this

area’.

45

29

27

26

19

16

15

0 20 40 60

Provide more face-to-face engagementopportunities

Provide clearer analysis of survey results(summary reports)

Improve promotion of opportunities togive feedback to communities

Provide more opportunities to givefeedback

Provide more background information

Nothing, keep up the good work

Other

% total responses

11

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

15% of respondents did not have confidence in the new fuel management strategy (Figure 11). Explanations as to why this answer was chosen include the following:

• Insufficient plan detail in a particular area to make an informed decision. • Inadequate engagement consultation. • Concerns about bureaucracy/capacity to deliver on the strategy.

Figure 11. Confidence in the overall process used to create the fuel management strategy

Suggested options for future strategic planning to reduce bushfire risk (Q11).

Question 11 asked survey respondents to rank five suggested options for future rounds of strategic planning from highest to lowest. The top three options selected were:

• Preventing ignitions (bushfires starting): ranked highest of first preferences. • Improving suppression (responding to bushfires): ranked highest of second preferences. • Pre-planning by agencies to support community recovery after bushfires: ranked highest of

third preferences.

6

15

13

35

24

6

0 10 20 30 40

Didn't respond

Not at all confident

Slightly confident

Fairly confident

Moderately confident

Very confident

% of total responses

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

12

Next Steps

Phase Three was an important opportunity to obtain feedback on the final proposed strategy, created from what our Hume communities indicated were important during previous stages of the online public consultation as well through direct conversations with our Strategic Bushfire Advisory Reference Group (SBARG) and partner agencies.

The Hume Strategic Fire Management Plan will be finalised and made available in the first half of 2020.

More information

Online: https://www.safertogether.vic.gov.au/understanding-risk

Email: forestfire.planninghume@delwp.vic.gov.au

13

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Appendix 1: Survey Phase Three Consultation on the Proposed Final Strategy

Overview

A new bushfire management strategy is being developed for Hume region. Our planning process will help determine where risk reduction activity (such as planned burning) takes place, as well as how often and how much land is burnt or modified.

The Hume region contains some of the most at-risk fire landscapes in the world. We have utilised the extensive knowledge and experience that exists within communities and bushfire management agencies to inform our planning. Our engagement activities have created conversations with key community members and other stakeholders, helping us to better understand how we can all work together to improve bushfire management, regardless of land tenure.

A draft Strategic Bushfire Management Plan has been developed for Hume, comprising of:

• a set of values and objectives for bushfire management in Hume that is shared across agencies and the community

• a Fuel Management Strategy, consisting of:

1. fire management zoning (public land) and performance measure targets to ensure objectives are met,

2. priority fuel management areas (private land and public land).

Consultation on the Proposed Final Strategy

We are now ready to show you our proposed final strategy and get your feedback on it.

Below you will find:

• a summary of what we heard from our past engagement opportunities, • our chosen objectives, • our proposed final fuel management strategy, • the expected performance of our strategy, and • a survey for your thoughts on the proposed final strategy.

We encourage you read the information below and then complete the survey.

The Proposed Final Strategy

By clicking on the links below, you will find detailed information about our chosen objectives, our proposed final fuel management strategy and the expected performance of our strategy. The maps below show how the strategy applies in the landscape.

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

14

What we heard We sought feedback from community and stakeholders on the fundamental values and objectives for bushfire management, and asked them to help shape and select the components of the fuel management strategy.

Below is a summary of the key things we have heard throughout the engagement process and how this information has informed the proposed final strategy. You can also download the detailed engagement summary reports from Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 2A.

15

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Objectives

During phase one, the community told us the most important values to protect. We took the top six values and translated these into measures and objectives for our bushfire management strategy. These objectives are:

• Minimise loss of human life from bushfire. • Minimise disruption of bushfires on critical infrastructure. • Maximise persistence of ecological communities. • Minimise impacts of fire on threatened species and fire sensitive flora, fauna and vegetation

communities. • Minimise impacts of bushfire on water catchments. • Minimise smoke impacts from bushfire.

Understanding the Fuel Management Strategy

We are now at the stage where we are finalising the details of the proposed fuel management strategy. The strategy meets key objectives such as providing protection for human life by focusing our fuel management activity on protecting townships. The strategy achieves other objectives such as protecting environmental assets and critical infrastructure. Through public consultation phase 2A, respondents selected Strategy B, a plan with a moderate amount of fuel management, as the best representation of their priorities. The fuel management strategy is a long-term guide for fire agencies to reduce bushfire risk through managing fuels. It uses Fire Management Zones (FMZ) on public land and Priority Fuel Management Areas (PFMAs) on public and private land to identify areas of land where fuel treatment will impact on bushfire risk and other values like endangered species and infrastructure assets. Fire Management Zones articulate how much and what type of fuel management will take place in that area, as well as how often the fuel management activity will take place. Each of the four FMZs differs in its intended fuel treatment aims and associated performance measures:

• Asset Protection Zone (red) - Aim to reduce fuel through planned burning or other methods approximately every 5 to 7 years.

• Bushfire Moderation Zone (orange) - Aim to reduce fuel through planned burning or other methods approximately every 8 to 15 years. Length of time between planned burns in some areas can vary due to ecological considerations.

• Landscape Management Zone (green) - Planned burning will focus on maintaining and improving ecosystem resilience, and fuel management will also be undertaken for risk reduction.

• Planned Burning Exclusion Zone (turquoise) - No planned burning, mainly to protect particular areas that can’t tolerate fire.

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

16

Priority Fuel Management Areas show where bushfire fuel treatments will most effectively reduce long-term bushfire risk to communities. Bushfire fuels include anything that can burn in a bushfire, such as dried grass, shrubs, branches, sticks, bark and leaf litter. Bushfire fuel treatments can include activities such as slashing, physical removal, grazing, mulching and planned burning. The choice of treatment will depend on the area’s risk, vegetation types, land use, community preferences and other values that are important. Not all land within PFMAs can or should be treated. Fuel treatments planned as part of PFMA implementation can only occur with the landowner’s consent. Treatments may be carried out by an individual landowner, a community planning together, and/or fire agencies such as the Country Fire Authority (CFA) and Forest Fire Management Victoria (FFMVic). More information of PFMAs is available in our frequently asked questions (FAQs). In this final phase of engagement, we have showed our proposed fuel management strategy on the map below. The map reflects Strategy B, which was chosen in the phase 2a public consultation, as the preferred strategy, with slight modification. Additional areas of Bushfire Moderation Zone (BMZ) were added to Strategy B to enable land managers to have greater flexibility when planning their fuel management programs. The strategy development is iterative and will evolve with the input of new data and improvements to scientific knowledge including modelling. Our strategic approach will also evolve with input from our communities and stakeholders. The Fire Management Zones and Priority Fuel Management Areas maps can be downloaded to see them in more detail.

Expected Performance of the Fuel Management Strategy

17

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

18

19

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

20

21

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

Hume Region Bushfire Management Planning Phase Three Engagement Summary

22

© The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning 2019

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) logo. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN 978-1-76077-785-2 Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.

Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please telephone the DELWP Customer Service Centre on 136186, email customer.service@delwp.vic.gov.au or via the National Relay Service on 133 677 www.relayservice.com.au. This document is also available on the internet at www.delwp.vic.gov.au.