Using Digital Orthophotographs to

Estimate Changes in Bushfire Threat

to Built Structures
Prof. Kim Lowell, University of Melbourne/ Dept. of Primary
Industries – Victoria

Ron Shamir1, Andreia Siqueira2, John White2, Alice

O’Connor3, Gary Butcher3, Mark Garvey1, Michael
Niven2
1Country Fire Authority Victoria
2Victorian Department of Sustainability and the Environment
3Geomatic Technologies

1
 Project Drivers

Has the bushfire threat to structures
changed since Ash Wednesday 1983?
– Can all structures be located economically?
(Cadastral records? Property sales?)
– Can bushfire threat for each be determined?
(Structure characteristics vs. micro-
surroundings vs. macro surroundings)

2
 Approach

Structure mapping:
– Human interpretation of 1982,
1983, 2006 digital ortho-
photographs

Bushfire threat:
– Landscape level weather,
topography, and vegetation

3
 Study Area

Three Ash Wednesday (1983) Fire
Scars + 500 m buffer

Macedon
Ranges

Dandenongs

Otways

4
 Structure Data

Orthophotographs (0.35 m resolution)
– Houses, Sheds, Commercial, Other
– Type Confidence
– Presence Conf.

5
 Validation

1 km2 samples
– 1. Independent visual re-checking for 2006
– 2. Ground-based verification if necessary

6

Weather Bushfire Threat Model(1)
– Bureau of Meteorology Data
– Prevailing wind direction on high fire danger days
– Plus perceived shift in wind on days of high FD

7
 Bushfire Threat Model (2)

Topography
– Slope
– Aspect

Vegetation
– Digital Orthophotographs
– Classified Forest/Non-forest
– Processed with “TreeDen” algorithm

8
 TreeDen algorithm

Identifies density of Forest pixels
– Does not identify forest canopy density

1982 2006
Non--forest
Non
Dense “Real”
Medium TreeDen
Sparse
9
 Bushfire Threat Model (4)

Combine wind,
topography, 1982
TreeDen layer for
1982 or 2006

Classify into Low-
High, Very High, 2006
Extreme
Decreased Risk
No Change
Change
Increased Risk
10
 Results

Validation
– Errors of Omission/Commission: 12%/0.5%
– +10% “not seen” (22% Total EoO)
– Type agreement for Houses/Sheds: 91%/78%

Not seen
Commission True Error
11
 Bushfire Structure Threat
Dandenongs Dandenong
Number of Houses and Sheds

4000 80
3500 70

Percentage of Structures
3000 60
2500 50
1982 1982
2000 40
2006 2006
1500 30
1000 20
500 10
0 0
Low-High Very High Extreme Low-High Very High Extreme

Plus… No relation between bushfire

threat and Ash Wednesday bushfire
damage
12
 Bushfire Threat Change (Area)

Net Increase
Decrease No Change Increase
(Decrease)

Otways 8 82 10 2
Macedon
Ranges
6 91 3 (3)

Dandenongs 13 79 8 (5)

13
 Costs

$6.00/structure or $4.60/property
– Data acquisition: 32% ($1.90/structure)
– Structure mapping: 39% ($2.30/structure)
– Threat modelling: 20% ($1.20/structure)
– Contingency: 10% ($0.60/structure)

Projected: $11.4 million for Victoria

14
 Conclusions

22% of structures will not be mapped –
mainly small sheds

Improvement of the bushfire threat
model requires ground-based data

Since 1983…
– Large increase in structures having Low-
High and Very High threats
– No substantial change in percentage of
structures in each threat class

15