Austral Ecology (2016) 41, 716–732

Ngadju kala: Australian Aboriginal fire knowledge in the

Great Western Woodlands
SUZANNE M. PROBER,1* EMMA YUEN,1,2 MICHAEL H. O’CONNOR1 AND
LES SCHULTZ3
1
CSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag 5, Wembley, Western Australia 6913, Australia (Email: suzanne.
prober@csiro.au), 2Aboriginal Housing Services, 99 Plain Street, East Perth, Western Australia 6004,
Australia and 3Ngadju Conservation, 75 Forrest St, Coolgardie, Western Australia 6429, Australia

Abstract Indigenous fire knowledge offers significant benefits for ecosystem management and human livelihoods,
but is threatened worldwide because of disruption of customary practices. In Australia, the historical prevalence and
characteristics of Aboriginal burning are intensely debated, including arguments that Aboriginal burning was frequent
across the continent. Frequent burning is supported by contemporary Aboriginal knowledge and practice in some re-
gions, but in southern Australia evidence is typically limited to historical and ecological records. Towards characterizing
Aboriginal fire regimes in southern Australia, we collaborated with Ngadju people from the globally significant Great
Western Woodlands in south-western Australia to document their fire knowledge. We used workshops, site visits, in-
terviews and occupation mapping to aid knowledge sharing. Consistent with the established significance of Aboriginal
fire in Australia, planned fires were important in Ngadju daily life and land management. However, Ngadju use of fire
was characterized by its selectivity rather than its ubiquity. Specifically, Ngadju described only highly targeted planned
burning across extensive eucalypt woodlands and sandplain shrublands. By contrast, frequent planned burning was de-
scribed for resource-rich landscape elements of more restricted extent (granite outcrop vegetation, grasslands and
coastal scrub). Overall, Ngadju fires are likely to have resulted in subtle but purposeful direct effects on the vegetation
and biota. However the extent to which they collectively constrained large, intense wildfires remains unclear. Ngadju
demonstrated a predictive knowledge of the ecological consequences of burning, including attention to fine-scale needs
of target organisms, and application of diverse fire regimes. These are consistent with the recently proposed concept that
Aboriginal burning was guided by ‘templates’ targeting different resources, although diverse regimes predominantly re-
flect edaphically driven vegetation patterns rather than template-driven use of fire to create resource diversity. We con-
clude that Ngadju fire knowledge fills an important gap in understanding Aboriginal fire regimes in southern Australia,
highlighting a novel balance between frequent and constrained use of fire.

Key words: Aboriginal burning, Indigenous land management, temperate eucalypt woodlands, template systems,
traditional fire knowledge.

INTRODUCTION In a global synthesis Huffman (2013) defined tradi-

Indigenous fire knowledge is one of many forms of tradi-
tional knowledge that can support ecological manage-
ment (Bohensky & Maru 2011; Huffman 2013),
leading to benefits ranging from carbon sequestration
to biodiversity conservation (Cook et al. 2012;
Fitzsimons et al. 2012; Huffman 2013; Preece 2013).
At the same time, recognition of indigenous fire knowl-
edge offers potential to improve livelihoods for indige-
nous people through land management roles (Hill et al.
2012). However, indigenous fire knowledge is threat-
ened worldwide, because of the disruption of traditional
ways of life, and government regulations that can render
traditional burning illegal (Preece 2007; Huffman 2013;
McCarter et al. 2014; Christianson 2015).
*Corresponding author.
Accepted for publication March 2016.
tional (including indigenous) fire knowledge as the
‘fire-related knowledge, beliefs and practices that have been
developed and applied on specific landscapes for specific
purposes by long-time inhabitants’. She concluded that
regional pyrogeographies are a combination of universal
and endemic fire knowledge. In particular, she identified
69 universal elements of traditional fire knowledge from
around the world, whilst emphasizing that fire regimes
need to be understood at the local scale because individ-
ual elements are expressed and combined to produce
highly differentiated fire regimes.
Across Australia, Aboriginal people have managed
landscapes using fire for an estimated 40 000–
60 000 years, longer than elsewhere in the world
(Bowman 1998; Gammage 2011; Huffman 2013).
Further, Bowman et al. (2004) emphasized that ‘more is
known about Aboriginal fire usage compared with any other
group of hunter–gatherer people on Earth’. Despite this,
debate is still intense regarding the importance and
characteristics of Australian Aboriginal fire regimes.

© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia doi:10.1111/aec.12377

 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA
On the one hand, several high-profile books have
focused on frequent Aboriginal burning as a dominant
process shaping ecosystems and landscapes across
most of Australia (Pyne 1991; Gammage 2011).
Supporting this are historical records of early
European travellers and colonizers, and evidence for
substantial ecosystem change where Aboriginal
burning is no longer practiced (Bowman 1998;
Gammage 2011). Gammage (2011) further developed
the argument for highly systematic Aboriginal
fire management through the concept of ‘templates’
— landscape configurations and ecosystem structures
proposed to cater to preferences of particular
biotic resource species (e.g. kangaroos or yams) —
actively achieved through fire and other management.
In a ‘template system’, different templates are
coordinated across landscapes to provide resource
(i.e. habitat) diversity, and linked to other resources
such as water.
On the other hand, historical and ecological evidence
is less reliable for highlighting where fires were infre-
quent, arguably contributing a bias towards interpreta-
tions that frequent and systematic fire was pervasive
(Benson & Redpath 1997; Fensham 1997; Silcock
et al. 2013). For example, Gammage (2011) argued that
‘Most of Australia was burnt about every 1–5 years depend-
ing on local conditions and purposes’ (p. 168). Several anal-
yses have addressed this imbalance through quantitative
approaches to the historical record (Fensham 1997;
Silcock et al. 2013). In Queensland, Silcock et al.
(2013) concluded that fire was rare in areas receiving
<500 mm mean annual rainfall, except in landscapes
dominated by spinifex (Triodia spp.). Together with
more cursory references to minimal fire beyond the me-
sic zone in south-western Australia (Hallam 1975;
Abbott 2003), these analyses suggested that Aboriginal
burning frequencies decreased with increasing aridity,
except in grassy landscapes.
In Australia there has also been the opportunity to
work with Aboriginal people still living on or near their
country. Most of these studies have focused on fre-
quently burnt tropical savanna and spinifex landscapes
(e.g. Burrows & Christensen 1991; Russell-Smith et al.
1997; Bird et al. 2005; Garde et al. 2009), again accentu-
ating frequent fire. However, in wooded landscapes of
southern Australia, there has been minimal direct docu-
mentation of Aboriginal burning, owing to assumptions
that this knowledge has been lost, or the view that tradi-
tional Aboriginal burning practices were corrupted fol-
lowing contact with Europeans in the nineteenth
century (Bowman 1998). Our understanding of Aborig-
inal burning in southern Australia is thus largely reliant
on historical, ecological and palynological evidence
(e.g. Hallam 1975; Benson & Redpath 1997; Gott
2005; Gammage 2008; Jurskis 2009; Mooney et al.
2011; Colloff 2014).
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
717
The 16 M ha region of south-western Australia known
as the Great Western Woodlands (GWW) is internation-
ally significant for its expanses of diverse eucalypt wood-
lands, shrublands, mallee and salt lake systems. The
relative intactness of its woodland landscapes contrasts
starkly with most other temperate eucalypt woodlands,
which have become highly fragmented or degraded with
development for agriculture (Hobbs & Yates 2000;
Prober et al. 2012). Despite their relative intactness, an
apparently increasing frequency of large, intense fires
has been identified as one of the most immediate threats
to the environmental values of the GWW, potentially
reflecting historical climatic cycles, anthropogenic
climate change or altered Aboriginal management
(Watson et al. 2008).
Ngadju people, the traditional owners of 5 M ha
centred around Norseman in the GWW, are working
towards greater involvement in contemporary land
management. Despite these aspirations, the global
significance of the GWW, and prevailing management
challenges, little has been documented regarding
Ngadju fire knowledge. To advance our understanding
of Aboriginal fire in southern Australia, enhance Ngadju
opportunities to work on country, and inform ecological
management, this study worked with Ngadju people to
document their contemporary knowledge about fire in
Ngadju and related country.
Given the well-established significance of Aboriginal
burning in Australia (Pyne 1991; Bowman 1998;
Gammage 2011), we expected planned fires to be an
important part of Ngadju culture and to reflect the
universal structure of traditional fire knowledge
(Huffman 2013). However, we also expected fire re-
gimes to reflect local conditions (Huffman 2013),
and in this context a number of questions were of par-
ticular interest: (i) whether Aboriginal use of fire in
the GWW was pervasive and frequent as in many
parts of Australia (Gammage 2011); (ii) whether and
how fire was applied in a predictive way to promote
natural resources (and consequently shape patterning
in the biota) at fine to landscape scales; and (iii)
how this aligned with Gammage’s (2011) concept of
template systems.
METHODS
This study worked with people of the Ngadju nation (see Ac-
knowledgements) following CSIRO human ethics procedures,
focusing on Ngadju fire (kala) knowledge in relation to Ngadju
country and nearby parts of the GWW in south-western
Australia (Fig. 1). We emphasize that the knowledge documented
is the intellectual property of the Ngadju nation. Senior author
Les Schultz is a custodian of Ngadju fire knowledge through
his Uncle; he helped initiate and implement the project,
contributed to workshops and inspired engagement by other
Ngadju.
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
718 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
Fig. 1. The Great Western Woodlands (GWW) region, the Ngadju Native Title Area and locations referred to in this study. This
study included knowledge and historical data reported from the wider GWW, with a focus on Ngadju people and country.
Data collection
Guided by Ngadju preferences, the project methodology focused
around four workshops and three field trips (from Esperance to
Cape Le Grand to visit coastal scrub in neighbouring Esperance
Nyungar country, Coolgardie to Burra Rocks, and Norseman to
Buldania Rocks). Workshops were augmented by one-on-one
unstructured key informant interviews with Dorothy Dimer,
(John) Danny Graham, Johnny Graham, Sonny Graham, Betty
Logan and Les Schultz; and three additional field trips near
Coolgardie and Norseman. Public release of information and
images was discussed and approved at meetings with the Ngadju
Claim Group and Ngadju Working Group in May 2013.
Workshops were held between October 2012 and March
2013 in Norseman, Coolgardie and Esperance, where most
Ngadju participants lived. They involved focus groups and
semi-structured discussions around key topics (importance and
uses of fire; aspects of lighting and controlling fires; types of
country; why, where and when to burn; fire in each landscape el-
ement; landscape-scale perspectives; future aspirations). Mem-
bers of all local Ngadju families were invited via mail-outs
undertaken by the Goldfields Land and Sea Council (GLSC);
financial support was offered to enable knowledgeable Elders to
attend. Some activities were separated into men’s and women’s
groups to respect cultural norms around knowledge sharing.
Other sessions involved the whole group and some included gov-
ernment land management officers. We used a range of work-
shop aids, including over 140 printed and digital images from
the GWW, 1:250 000 topographic maps, and Google Earth im-
ages. The maps were used in occupation mapping to understand
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
Ngadju camping and travel patterns whilst on country. In later
workshops we reviewed earlier topics and targeted key gaps.
Ngadju terms are indicated if provided by Ngadju participants
(Appendix S1), spelt according to the draft Ngadju dictionary
(Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Centre 2009);
scientific names concur with the Australian Plant Census
(https://www.anbg.gov.au/chah/apc/about-APC.html; accessed
September 2015). Core sessions were recorded; representative
quotations were transcribed verbatim where possible, or
paraphrased from authors’ notes. Ngadju preferred that if
known, sources of quotes were stated to acknowledge ownership.
Some views emerged collectively in workshops, so could not be
linked to particular quotes or people.
Ngadju expressed their culture as live and evolving; consis-
tent with this, the results of this study reflect what Ngadju know
today, potentially including influences post-European coloniza-
tion (Spoon 2014). This paper synthesises this knowledge to set
it in broader Australian and international contexts; further
details are available in an illustrated report distributed to
Ngadju participants (Prober et al. 2013).
The environment of Ngadju country
Annual mean maximum and minimum temperatures in
Ngadju country range from about 23.4 to 25.0 °C and 9.0 to
11.2 °C respectively, with 10–30 potential frost days annually,
based on records from Salmon Gums, Norseman, Coolgardie
and Balladonia (Bureau of Meteorology 2015). Mean annual
rainfall decreases from about 350 mm in the south to 270 mm
in the north-east.
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA
The vegetation of much of Ngadju country and the wider
GWW is characterized by mosaics of eucalypt woodland,
mallee, sandplain and saltbush shrublands, and salt lake
and granite outcrop ecosystems (Fig. 2). Vegetation pat-
terning is governed by distinctive soil and landform mo-
saics, in the west derived through differential erosion of
the underlying (granitoid) Yilgarn craton and associated
‘greenstone’ intrusions (Beard 1990). Eastwards, Ngadju
country extends through similar vegetation on other geo-
logical formations, to the saltbush plains and mallee
shrublands overlying Nullarbor limestones.
Mature woodlands comprise well-spaced, single-stemmed
eucalypts from 10 to 25 m tall, that are typically obligate-
seeders (e.g. gimlet, Eucalyptus salubris) or weak resprouters
(e.g. salmon gum, Eucalyptus salmonophloia; Yates et al. 1994).
Because of discontinuous distribution of fuels, sometimes aug-
mented by succulent chenopod understoreys, mature wood-
lands do not burn easily (hereafter ‘fire resistant’).
Nevertheless stand-replacing crown fires can occur in extreme
conditions, with historical intervals estimated at about 300–
400+ years (Yates et al. 1994; O’Donnell et al. 2011). Sandplain
shrublands (dominated variously by Allocasuarina, Acacia and
Proteaceae species) and mallee (of diverse eucalypt and
sclerophyllous shrub composition) have more continuous fuels,
burning more frequently and recovering more quickly than
woodlands (about every 14–90+ years; O’Donnell et al. 2011;
Enright et al. 2012; Gosper et al. 2013b).
Workshops considered 12 key landscape elements (mostly
equivalent to vegetation types) as identified and described to
us by Ngadju (Table 1).
Fig. 2. The distribution of major vegetation types in the Great Western Woodlands and the Ngadju Native Title Area (consolidated
from Beard et al. 2013). See Table 1 for cross-matched landscape elements recognized by Ngadju.
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
719
Historical records
To supplement direct documentation of Ngadju knowledge,
we searched historical records (to 1910 and some beyond) for
information pertaining to landscape fires (i.e. burnt ground or
vegetation) in or near the Ngadju Native Title Area. Methods
and results are detailed in Appendix S2 and referred to in the
discussion where relevant.
RESULTS
Fire in Ngadju country
Ngadju expressed a strong relationship with fire, whilst
recognizing its dangers. These were communicated
through statements such as: ‘Fire is culture: water is num-
ber one; fire is second only to water’ (Stephen Rule); ‘It can
be your friend, and it can be your enemy… it can purify or it
can destroy’ (Betty Logan). The significance of fire was
reflected not only in its varied uses in land management,
but in more than 20 other applications that Ngadju artic-
ulated involving physical, social and spiritual well-being
(Table 2).
From a land management perspective, Ngadju ex-
plained that fire in the right place keeps the country
healthy, facilitates access by cleaning out thick scrub, at-
tracts animals to hunting grounds by promoting
greenpick (as widely noted in local historical records,
Appendix S2), and stimulates flowering and germina-
tion. In the wrong place, however, Ngadju emphasized
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
720 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.

Table 1. Elements of Ngadju country and associated fire regimes as described by Ngadju

Landscape Ngadju characterization of Best representation Needs Description of Prone to

element landscape element in Figure 2 planned fire? planned fire wildfire?

Rockhole Vegetation surrounding ‘Granite rocks’ Yes Cool, smoky fire of Yes†
vegetation granite outcrops, typically about 1 ha, any one
with jam (murrun, Acacia patch burnt every 3–
acuminata and A. burkittii) 10 years, many patches
and other plant species such burnt each year
as kurrajongs (Brachychiton
gregorii), fruit trees (e.g.
Quandongs; tumpari,
Santalum acuminatum),
medicine bushes, grasses and
wildflowers. Rockholes
support key water resources
and are small but scattered
abundantly and widely across
the region.
Grasslands and Ngadju described two types ‘Mallee Grassland’ Yes Cool, smoky fire every Yes†
grassy mallee of ‘grasslands’, those (spinifex), parts of 1–2 years, to keep grass
dominated by spinifex ‘Mallee’, spear grass <20 cm
(Triodia spp.), and those grasslands not
dominated by other grasses mapped
such as spear grass
(Austrostipa spp.), each with
or without mallee Eucalyptus
overstoreys. Non-spinifex
grasslands are not well known
in the GWW but we were told
they occur in treeless areas at
the edges of salt lakes and at
Fraser Range, and become
more prominent as open
mallee towards the
Nullarbor.
Coastal scrub Ngadju country extends to ‘Scrub-heath’, Yes Cool fire 5–10 yearly, or Yes†
the south coast in the Israelite possibly ‘Mallee- hot fire if overgrown
Bay – Point Culver area, heath’, near the coast
which supports coastal scrub
with characteristic Banksia
and other species. This area
was particularly important for
some Ngadju groups in
summer, providing fresh
water and seafood.
Sandplains The sandplains (tarpan ‘Scrub-heath’, Targeted Burn limited areas for Yes
(shrubland and piriny) refer to shrublands ‘Thicket’, parts of travel routes, hunting or
mallee shrubland) and mallee (Eucalyptus) ‘Mallee’ greenpick, and to
shrublands characteristic of protect woodlands and
white and yellow sandplains. important sites. Avoid
They support many bush <7 yearly
foods, including bush turkeys
(kipara), bobtails (yurna),
goannas (karulka), lizards,
snakes, wildflowers, bardis,
tubers and medicines.
(Shrubby mallee on
limestone sands near the
coast and duplex soils are

(Continues)

doi:10.1111/aec.12377 © 2016 Ecological Society of Australia

 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA 721

Table 1. (Continued)

Landscape Ngadju characterization of Best representation Needs Description of Prone to

element landscape element in Figure 2 planned fire? planned fire wildfire?

included here as they were

difficult to distinguish.)
Old growth Old growth woodlands ‘Woodland’ Minimal Burn small (<1 ha) No
woodland (ngarta/ngarta-waarr) patches with cool fire to
include salmon gum clear campsites; protect
(marrlinja, Eucalyptus trees by removing litter
salmonophloia), gimlet first; protect from
(joorderee or ‘tutara’, wildfire by burning
E. salubris), blackbutt (E. away from woodland
dundasii, E. lesouefii, E. edges
clelandii, e.g. ‘kundarn’) and
other eucalypts. Ngadju
would often say ‘gums’ rather
than woodland, and may look
at the trees and undergrowth
separately.
Regrowth Many woodland trees ‘are ‘Woodland’ Minimal ‘Go somewhere else’, ?
woodland sensitive to heat’, i.e. killed by burn for access or
all but the mildest fires. They possibly greenpick
regenerate as ‘Regrowth’
woodlands involving dense
stands of young trees (ngarta
kaja).
Tea-tree ‘The tea tree (pukan, Scattered throughout, Minimal Cool ground-fire if No
Melaleuca spp.) is a symbol for not mapped. aiming to encourage
the Ngadju country’ (Bonnie tubers and grasses
Smith). ‘He grows anywhere –
round the granite, amongst the
gums, valley, on a hill’ (Les
Schultz). Tea tree can form a
prominent layer in
woodlands, providing shelter
from wind when camping.
She-oaks Several types of she-oak trees ‘Low Woodland’ Minimal Kurli mostly too sparse No
were recognized. The kurli (kurli), parts of to burn; raalinj burnt
(whistle trees, Casuarina ‘Woodland/Scrub’ regularly around Fraser
pauper) occur in open (raalinj) Range during the
woodlands on red soils near pastoral era
salt lakes; they are more
common to the north of
Ngadju country. The
‘raalinj’ (rock she-oaks,
Allocasuarina huegeliana) are
common on the hills around
Fraser Range.
Saltbush and Saltbush (especially Atriplex ‘Saltbush and No — No
bluebush plains nummularia and A. vesicaria) Bluebush’
and bluebush (Maireana
sedifolia) can form a dominant
shrub layer on open plains or
beneath trees in woodlands,
especially near salt lakes and
on the Nullabor Plain. They
are valued as feed for animals,
habitat for bardis and a
source of medicine; the open
plains are important hunting
grounds.

(Continues)

© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia doi:10.1111/aec.12377

722 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.

Table 1. (Continued)

Landscape Ngadju characterization of Best representation Needs Description of Prone to

element landscape element in Figure 2 planned fire? planned fire wildfire?

Stony or rocky Different types of stony or Not specifically No — No

ground rocky ground (parna mapped. Includes
purinya) occur sporadically woodland and
throughout Ngadju country. shrubland.
The stones might be ‘white,
flints, ironstones or greenstones’.
‘Long time ago people used the
quartz as a flint – to make
sparks. That was a very
important power by our
people…People feared the
sparks.’ (Sonny Graham,
James Schultz)
Paperbarks Paperbarks grow in rare Highly localized, not No — No
swampy country with fresh specifically mapped.
water. They are valued for
cooking fish, toilet paper and
fence posts but this country is
often avoided because of
abundant snakes and
mosquitoes.
Succulents Chains of large and small salt ‘Samphire’, often No — No
lakes form natural fire breaks fringing salt lakes
in Ngadju country. Some of
the lake edges support
succulent vegetation e.g.
samphires (‘kukunjeri’,
Tecticornia spp.) that are good
for bardis.
†
Managed with planned fire.

the bush can take centuries to recover and valuable assets
can be lost. For example, Johnny Graham stated:
‘You see, down south is different to here. Up north it’s
different to here. Central Australia it’s different to here. …
The more you burn that country, the better things grow.
You take all the trees down south – like the black boys,
jarrah trees – they won’t grow without fire. But here, bad
fire goes through here – it takes years for it to come back.
You burn these gimlets in the Great Western Woodlands,
or in the salmon gums – it takes thousands of years to come
back.’
Ngadju use of fire to burn country was thus described as
highly selective, involving three main fire regimes: fre-
quent fire in intensively used landscape elements;
targeted and selective burning in wildfire-prone vegeta-
tion; and minimal planned fire in extensive landscape el-
ements that were considered relatively (although not
always) resistant to wildfires (see below, Table 1).
Across these three broad regimes, the type of fire ap-
plied was typically described as ‘cool and smoky’ or ‘cool
and trickly’, which could be achieved in a range of
conditions: ‘In the morning when it’s dewy and the ground’s
still fairly damp’ (James Schultz), ‘not on a hot day’ (Sonny
Graham), ‘at the right time of year, when the grass is still
green’ (James Schultz), ‘In the warmer times of year the fire
needs to be started in the morning before the Esperance Doctor
[winaka, sea breeze] comes up’. In rarer circumstances,
hot fires were expected, for example if the vegetation
was overgrown. Fires could be conducted at most times
of year outside the hot season (Nganji) if conditions were
right. Burning ‘when the weather starts to cool down in about
March to early April [maarday]’ allows plants to recover
quickly with the coming rains; other suitable times indi-
cated were just before the rains around July–August
(Karrlkunja) when the wind is westerly; or with the
finishing rains around September (Ngawu, O’Connor
& Prober 2010). Although Ngadju emphasized that fires
were carefully timed to suit conditions, it was unclear
whether planned fires sometimes became larger than
expected because of unfavourable conditions.
In conducting a fire, Ngadju described the impor-
tance of ensuring fire-sensitive assets are protected: ‘Do
a quick walk through. Check that you’re not going to burn

doi:10.1111/aec.12377 © 2016 Ecological Society of Australia

 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA 723

Table 2. Applications of fire described by Ngadju

Physical health and well-being

• Warmth and light

• Food preparation
• Preparing bush medicine, charcoal for toothpaste, hot rocks to relive headaches and toothaches
• Smoking away biting insects
• Destroying bull ant nests in campsites (‘light a fire right on top of them’ Johnny Graham, Les Schultz)
• Warming the ground for sleeping: ‘Fire is like a blanket. They would dig a hole big enough for the family – dig over the soil to soften it. They
would light a fire on it, and when it was time they would scrape away the fire and go to bed on the warm ground. This was ‘kujera’, our electric
blanket’ (Betty Logan, Dorothy Dimer)
• Clearing the ground around campsites to help avoid snakes and spiders, e.g. ‘death adders in the spinifex’ (James Schultz)
Social and spiritual well-being
• A focal point for family meetings, story-telling, celebrations and ritual dances
• Spiritual cleansing and warding off bad spirits, for example, very smoky fires are lit in a ‘sorry camp’ after someone has passed away
• Physical punishments for misdemeanours
• Signalling – if entering someone else’s country, to invite people to gatherings or ask for assistance
• Taming dingo (ngurpany) pups by exposing them to smoke: ‘Smoking them takes the wildness out.’ (Dorothy Dimer, Betty Logan)
• Men’s business
• Women’s business
• (Self-defence; noted in historical literature, Appendix S2)
Facilitating resource use
Hunting
• To attract animals by encouraging greenpick
• To hunt kangaroo (kulpirr, Macropus fuliginosus, marlu, M. rufus): ‘To catch a kangaroo with fire you might have three men stay down
wind, then a bunch of 3–10, kids and all, go upwind and light a fire. The kangaroo will hop away from the fire and get close to those waiting for it.’
(Danny Graham)
• To hunt goannas, by smoking one of the two openings of a burrow so the goanna will come out the other
• To hunt bats and moths, by holding up tall burning sticks
• To catch animals by walking behind the line of a fire. It was noted that hawks, eagles, crows and dingoes hunt in this way too.
Making tools
• Use hot ash to harden spears, boomerangs and artefacts shaped from green wood of eucalypts, jam, tea tree and sandalwood
• The black gum exuded by burning spinifex was used as glue, e.g. to attach a kangaroo tooth to the end of a woomera or spear.
Water storage
• To enlarge rockholes over time. ‘Light the fire on top of the rock. The fire cracks the rock. Move the fire and flake the rock away, put fire back
on’ (James Schultz). ‘And put water on it. Fire and water. The hot and cold cracks it’ (Johnny Graham). Continue the process to make the
rockhole (James Schultz).
Land management
• See main text

something that’s important for the land like mallee hens’ nests’
(Les Schultz). Assets included big trees (ngarta, ‘these
are mansions for the animals’ (Les Schultz)), logs that
provide habitat, fruit trees such as quandongs (tumpari,
Santalum acuminatum) and sandalwood (Santalum
spicatum), trees with bardi (edible grubs) such as jam
(murrun, Acacia acuminata, A. burkittii: ‘We don’t want
to burn the wattles because that’s our little bardi supply’
(James Schultz)), medicine bushes, nests, sacred sites
and caves. Protecting these involved lightly burning
around them or sweeping away litter using broombushes
such as emu bush (noondoo, Eremophila spp.) or tea
tree (pukan, Melaleuca spp.).
Ngadju also described two types of water trees that
need protection, those shaped by Ngadju (wanyall),
e.g. from salmon gum (marrlinja) to form a living bowl
that collects water; and trees with watery roots such as
kurrajong (Brachychiton populneus), christmas tree
(kunhapiti, Grevillea nematophylla), giant mallee
(kutan, E. oleosa) and black morrel (E. melanoxylon).
For trees with water in their roots, Loretta Smith told
us: ‘We get water from the root too. So you can’t have too
much fire round the trees. Because it’ll dry up the roots …’
Stephen Rule elaborated that ‘Leaves on top will keep the
roots moist…[Don’t rake away] all the leaves because the
leaves protect the water’.
Places requiring frequent planned burning
Some of the most intensively used parts of Ngadju coun-
try even today are the ‘rockholes’ – the country on and
around granite outcrops, which are a major water source
(Table 1). Grasslands, and for some groups in some sea-
sons, the coastal scrub around Israelite Bay, were

© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia doi:10.1111/aec.12377

724 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
important places for hunting and fishing (Table 1).
These are the places Ngadju described as needing fire
the most, for greenpick (yurlki), to control fuels and to
maintain access.
Ngadju described specific fire regimes around
rockholes (Fig. 3a). A patch of bush adjoining a rockhole
might be burnt each year, so there is greenpick the fol-
lowing year. The patch might be the size of ‘a football field
or two’ (1 ha), with any particular patch needing fire ev-
ery 3–10 years, depending on rainfall and hence how
quickly the vegetation ‘gets too thick’ again. Dorothy
Dimer summed up this practice:
‘The bush is now all scrubby again. It has always been
kept down in the past, even we did that around the
rockholes. The family would go back every few years and
do it again… The fires would slowly burn, there was no
break, you could leave it to trickle along.’
As implied, Ngadju preferred cool fires, burning only
the ground layer so one could ‘see right through the wattles’
(Les Shultz). Hot fire ‘kills everything, bringing up every seed
in the land, but if it’s a cool fire, then only some seeds come up’
(Les Schultz). Copious collection of wood for campfires
was also recognized for its role in keeping the site clean,
with little dry timber to trigger more intense fire (Fig. 3b).
Grasslands, dominated by spear grass (Austrostipa
spp.) (Fig. 3c) or spinifex, were considered to need even
more frequent fire – ‘almost yearly’ (James Schultz) when
there is rain. ‘You’d burn one area, leave it, travel to an-
other…by the time you come back the following year or next
6 months, it’s blooming and …back to a hunting ground
again’ (David Graham). Consistent with this, seven of
the 30 historical records of landscape fire for the region
(Appendix S2) appeared to involve grassy vegetation (in-
cluding rockhole vegetation), despite the relatively small
area these occupy in the landscape. Ngadju emphasized
that when burning grassy areas it is important to ‘[Burn]
only in patches. We don’t all out big burn’ (Les Schultz).
For example, this allows the emus (jula, Dromaius
novaehollandiae) to lay their eggs in the spinifex: ‘When
the emu lays egg, he lays egg in that [unburnt spinifex]’
(Bonnie Smith).
In grasslands with mallee overstorey, planned fires
were also used to protect trees: ‘We burn the spinifex, so
it [wildfire] doesn’t burn the big mallees (Les Schultz).’
The mallees were noted to have a range of uses: ‘you
get bardis in the trunks and the roots, and these don’t come
back till the mallee tree matures again’ (Loretta Smith,
Betty Logan); and ‘the roots of the giant mallee are an emer-
gency water supply’ (Loretta Smith). However it was rec-
ognized the mallee can recover relatively quickly if burnt,
so is a lower priority for fire protection: ‘Mallee’s not the
highest priority. The highest priority is the big trees. Mallee
country second, scrub last’ (Les Schultz).
Finally, Ngadju recognized that the coastal scrubs
quickly become overgrown, so require regular burning
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
(perhaps every 5 years) to keep them open (Fig. 3d).
Cool burns were recommended to keep flame heights
low and avoid damaging trees, although hot fire was ex-
pected in overgrown scrub.
Wildfire-prone vegetation managed selectively through
burning
Apart from coastal scrubs, the most wildfire-prone vege-
tation types in Ngadju country and adjacent parts of the
GWW were considered to be the shrublands and
shrubby mallee communities on white and yellow
sandplains (also on related duplex soils, and on lime-
stones and lime sands in the east; Figure 3e, Table 1,
hereafter ‘sandplains’). This flammability was expressed
in statements such as: ‘It’s a real fierce burn. Oil from the
Eucalyptus – it’s just like chucking kerosene on the fire’
(Johnny Graham), and was evident in three historical re-
ports of fierce wildfires (1893–1900) threatening life and
property near the telegraph line between Israelite Bay
and Eyre (Appendix S2).
Ngadju thus considered the sandplains to be places to
avoid in the fire season, reflected in statements such as
‘Avoid heathlands for safety from fire’ (Betty Logan), and
in what appeared for some to be a fear for the sandplain
(e.g. Dorothy Dimer’s story of the ‘little people’, Appen-
dix S4). The sandplains were considered dangerous
when unburnt too – thick and easy to get lost in, difficult
to hunt in – ‘forget about it’ (Johnny Graham).
Ngadju told us that lightning regularly ignites fires on
the sandplains in summer. These fires were considered
natural and allowed to run their course: ‘Fire is always
there anyway, it’s normal. It’s like Uncle Jack said: that
country will work itself out. It’ll get fires yeah, but it works it-
self out. It’s got lake systems and all that help stop the bush-
fires. But if we’re out there…we can’t prevent big fires’ (Les
Schultz).
Ngadju felt that today, it could be good to establish
fire breaks to reduce large fires, but regular systematic
burning to control fuels across the sandplains was not
noted as a cultural practice except at woodland edges
(see below): ‘No [we wouldn’t try to control all the fuels
on the sandplain]. Too much country, too much fuels to
walk around. You gotta walk. Only where it’s useful to
them…The old people wouldn’t need to burn it’ (Sonny
Graham).
Whilst Ngadju did not describe an intent to actively
manage the sandplains across broad scales, they indi-
cated targeted applications of moderate-sized fires. First,
fire was used to keep travel routes open. ‘They came here
for the ochre deposits and they’ve got Peak Charles over here.
They had to go and visit them’ (James Schultz). Long-
distance routes across sandplains between Norseman
and Southern Cross, and Coolgardie and Southern
Cross (totalling >400 km) were also described.
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA 725

Fig. 3. Examples of Great Western Woodland landscape elements. (a) The bush around the rockholes becomes too thick if not reg-
ularly burnt (rockhole near Coolgardie). (b) Les Schultz collecting firewood around a rockhole near Norseman: ‘This kept the bush clear
of fire hazards’. (c) Spear-grass (Austrostipa spp.) grassland on dunes at the eastern edge of Lake Cowan. (d) Sonny Graham in coastal
scrub burnt a few years ago (Ngyungar country near Esperance). (e) Fire on the sandplain promotes flowering and cleans up dead
wood (Frank Hann National Park). (f) Ngadju felt that ‘the trees and bushes are too far apart to carry a fire’ in salmon gum woodland such
as this one near Coolgardie (to the north of Ngadju country). (g) After a fire in woodland the saplings (ngarta kaja) come up densely
(Frank Hann National Park). (h) Open saltbush and bluebush country in mosaic with salmon gum woodland, such as this one near
Coolgardie, possibly represents a ‘kangaroo template’ (Gammage 2011) although the degree to which they are driven by fire, other
active management or environmental conditions is debatable. ‘For hunting it is good to have open ground but it is good to have some cover
too, to hide from the kangaroos’ (Johnny Graham, Norseman).

© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia doi:10.1111/aec.12377

726 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
Second, fires were used to smoke animals out of the
scrub. ‘If we burn out a patch of that [sandplain] there —
we know we’ve got a feed. That’s our Woolworths, Coles’
(Les Schultz). Fires for hunting game were similarly
noted in one local historical record (Roe 1849, Appen-
dix S2).
Third, although sandplains were not preferred living
areas, fire could help make them more liveable if re-
quired — by opening them up, clearing the ground of
snakes and encouraging greenpick. The practicalities of
hunting influenced the size of these fires: ‘Need a fair
bit, so kangaroos get room to feed…a fire might trickle for a
week’ (Sonny Graham). ‘But not too much if you gotta go
looking for them [the kangaroos]’ (James Schultz).
Aboriginal-lit fires in mallee, scrubs and thickets were
also noted in up to eight of the 30 historical records, in-
cluding two records associated with station management
(1934–1935), and two early records indicating numer-
ous patches of burnt ground in the mallee and scrub of
the south-east (Carey 1877; Page 1898, Appendix S2).
Ngadju were uncertain about the fire frequency
resulting from wild and planned fires on sandplains,
but suggestions included ‘if burnt year after year it becomes
a desert’ (James Schultz) and ‘a different patch might be
burnt each year, and it might be seven years before the same
patch is burnt again’ (Les Schultz). They viewed fire as
both a positive and negative force in this type of country.
They described how fire cleans up dead wood, promotes
flowering and nectar production, helps regeneration of
edible plants like wild cucumber (ngaajun, Billardiera
lehmanniana) and twining fringe lily (jungkajungka,
Thysanotus patersonii), and favours some animals: ‘The
bush turkeys (kipara, Ardeotis australis) would run along to-
wards the fire with their mouths open, catching the grasshop-
pers coming towards them’ (Danny Graham). On the other
hand Ngadju described how fire disadvantages small
animals such as bobtails (yurna, Tiliqua rugosa) that
are ‘too slow to escape’, and wallabies, mallee fowl
(ngunnamara, Leiopa ocellata) and other birds that like
to hide in the dense vegetation. Johnny Graham empha-
sized that ‘Fire is the worst thing going for the mallee fowl.
They get nothing to eat; all the seeds are gone. They fly away.’
Relatively fire resistant vegetation managed minimally with
planned fire
Although some vegetation types are wildfire prone,
Ngadju recognized that extensive parts of their country
are naturally relatively resistant to fire and did not feel
that widespread fuel-management fires were necessary
in those areas. Rather, these areas were considered a ref-
uge in summer from the flammable sandplains: ‘Avoid
heathlands for safety from fire, safer in woodland country’
(Betty Logan). ‘You can be safe from fire in stony country’.
In particular, old-growth woodlands were considered
too open to carry a wildfire easily (Table 1, Fig. 3f, ‘the
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
trees and bushes are too far apart to carry a fire’), and fires
in shrublands were said to often ‘fizzle out’ at the wood-
land boundary. Similarly, there were no clear historical
records of woodland fires (Appendix S2).
Nevertheless, Ngadju related that in extreme condi-
tions ‘a really bad fire that goes up in the trees…can only
be left to burn out’. They noted that the trees are killed
and the woodland ‘takes hundreds of years to grow back’
(Johnny Graham). After such a fire, the saplings that
come up densely were referred to as ngarta kaja (‘chil-
dren trees’, Fig. 3g, Table 1). The dense regrowth was
considered good for nothing: ‘It gets that thick, a kanga-
roo can’t get through it. We just go elsewhere’ (Johnny
Graham). Although it was recognized that regrowth
woodlands support more fuels, they weren’t seen as a
priority for fire management except for access: ‘They’re
expendable. You’d rather look after the old growth. If there’s
a patch blocking access to the rocks…we’d burn them [the
saplings] out. For access – so you can get into the bush’
(Les Schultz). One participant suggested thick regrowth
could at times be burnt to encourage grass, but there was
no clear consensus on this.
Consequently, we were told that ‘The old people usually
wouldn’t start a fire in this country…Any eucalypts – any
gums – you try to stay away from. Especially the old growth.
We wouldn’t burn it. We wouldn’t have a major burn.’ (Les
Schultz, Johnny Graham). ‘This country here – it’s not
meant to be burnt’ (Johnny Graham).
Rather, Ngadju indicated the best way to help prevent
intense woodland fires is to burn a buffer around the
woodland edges: ‘We’d burn back from the woodland, back
this way. Rather than burning to the woodland, burn away
from it (Les Schultz).’ If the woodland adjoins grassland,
‘burn the grass not the trees’ (James Schultz). Collecting
firewood from along woodland edges was also recog-
nized to strengthen the buffer.
Although rare, Ngadju did describe special cases that
would have contributed to a sparse patchwork of
ground-fires in frequently-used woodlands. ‘Cool fires
you could have — but very small, to set up camp, creeping
fires’. ‘Just campfire burns, around the campfire’ (Les
Schultz). These were described as up to a hectare, to
clean the ground and leave ‘nowhere for the snakes and
crawling insects to hide’, or to protect significant sites or
resources such as quandongs. If burning in old growth
woodlands, Ngadju emphasized that the old trees and
hollow logs need protecting: ‘If you really must burn in
that particular area because of sites or whatever. Get a rake
and pull the stuff away from the tree. And just make sure
the fire don’t go to the tree. Because it will kill them’ (Les
Schultz). Ngadju indicated that the fire should be cool,
slow, and less than a metre high.
As for woodlands, Ngadju considered that the succu-
lent saltbush (Atriplex spp.) and bluebush (Maireana
sedifolia) (Table 1) burn only in extreme conditions –
‘even when grass grows between the saltbushes – the grass will
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA
burn, but he (saltbush) out on his own’ (James Schultz).
Burning was not considered necessary to re-invigorate
saltbushes: ‘Didn’t need it [fire], it’s like that all year round.
The shoots come up naturally. Kangaroos eat it down’
(James Schultz). However, if it does burn ‘Saltbush would
take years to recover’ (Johnny Graham).
Additionally, some families relate that long-ago,
their ancestors made the treeless bluebush and
saltbush plains for hunting (Fig. 3h): ‘Around Rowles
Lagoon and Twenty-eight and Heine’s [north of
Coolgardie] — there are no big trees. Our ancestors
burnt out the big trees. The bushes are good and thick
there — the bluebush’ (Betty Logan). These areas are
often at the edges of salt lakes, and it was recognized
that ‘Lots of trees don’t like salt’ (Sonny Graham). It
was not clear whether salt could be a primary cause
of treelessness, or whether, once treeless, it was diffi-
cult for trees to re-establish: ‘If we cut trees down and
they lay there and deteriorated – the wind blow seeds
where the dead tree is and they will germinate. But they
can’t germinate on there [open saltbush plain] — they
need nutrition, it needs an element of the dead tree’
(James Schultz).
Other types of country where planned fire was not
considered necessary (Table 1) include stony ground
(parna purinya), and she-oak/whistle tree (kurli,
Casuarina pauper) woodland on red soils: ‘You haven’t
got enough fuel [on the stony ground], it won’t even burn’
(Johnny Graham). ‘They [whistle trees] don’t have a lot
a fuel around them’ (Sonny Graham). On Fraser Range
on the other hand, Danny Graham observed regular
burning of rock she-oak (raalinj, Allocasuarina
huegeliana) during the 1960s–1970s: ‘The station-hands
used to burn the hills, to help germinate the she-oak…now
the soil is getting washed away…the wind blows them over’
(Danny Graham). This combination of grazing and
burning thus appears more severe than earlier times.
Similarly, it was usually too wet to burn amongst the
paperbarks (‘We had no need to burn them. This is swamp
country’, James Schultz) or in the succulent samphire
(kukunjeri, Tecticornia spp.) around salt lakes (‘Sam-
phire bushes will slow down the fire because all the leaves
are full of water’, Sonny Graham). Tea-tree dominated
understoreys were considered by some to suppress fires
also, but others felt it could burn intensely. Nevertheless,
Tea-tree was not considered a candidate for planned
burning: ‘That’s like a significant tree to Ngadju…When
you see a pukan tree you know you coming into Ngadju
country… We don’t burn them’ (Stephen Rule).
A landscape view
Whilst it is clear that Ngadju lit many purposeful fires
across their country, it was more difficult to gauge how
these fires collectively influenced the landscape.
Towards building a landscape-scale picture, Ngadju
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
727
described how they lived on country. Before disruption
by Europeans, they said they lived in family groups of
about 8–30 people, usually around rockholes with reli-
able water. In Dorothy Dimer’s experience on pastoral
stations in the early 1900s: ‘People used to have summer
and winter camps. They rotated between camps all the time,
spending time for a season or two at one, then they needed to
let it rehabilitate. They might do some burning before
leaving.’
It was thought that between Coolgardie, Peak Charles
and Fraser Range, there would have been at least 10
family groups, probably more, conducting these and
other fires. Population numbers are not known, but
Ngadju estimated perhaps 200–1000 people in that area.
R. Harvey in Bates (about 1908 a,b) offered a compara-
ble estimate: ‘The Norseman subtribe extended from Mt
Jimberlanya (dry hill) to Newcamin (Dundas) and west to
Mt Badling [four days journey, possibly Mt Holland].
The Norseman sub-tribe called their country Mree and were
about 300 in number though now reduced to 20.’
People also travelled long distances along ‘Ngadju
highways’ or songlines, to ceremonial gatherings or to ac-
cess resources such as ochre. As Les Schultz described:
‘They would walk along carrying a fire stick…and burn
rockholes and grasslands on the way.’ Over 1500 km of
these travel routes was recognized between Coolgardie,
Peak Charles and Fraser Range, passing through series
of rockholes. Figure 4 depicts such a journey and associ-
ated fires.
Ngadju estimated that each family group might con-
duct a patch burn ‘probably every couple of days’ (Les
Schultz). This included ‘probably two or three [hunting
fires] a week’ (Danny Graham), and at least 20
(>0.5 ha) patches around rockholes and in grasslands
per year. Individual decisions to light fires concerned
‘setting up the food chain’ (green pick), clearing for access
or camping, protecting resources and cultural heritage,
or hunting. Ngadju felt that the resulting patterns across
the landscape were a consequence of these many smaller
decisions, rather than part of a strategic fire plan: ‘[We
burnt] primarily for the food chain and for cultural heri-
tage…Then we’ve got the big landscape picture – that just
happens naturally’ (Les Schultz).
Nevertheless, these would have summed to thousands
of fires per year. Ngadju described how salt lakes, rocky
ridges, granite outcrops, fire resistant woodlands and
saltbush plains already act as natural fire breaks. Whilst
no explicit plan was indicated, they felt that the fire mo-
saic, concentrated along travel routes and overlain on
the natural landscape mosaic, could break up fires in
the more flammable parts of Ngadju country. ‘The reason
why there’s so many [woodland] wildfires right now is because
we’re not burning regularly using little patches’ (Les
Schultz). Copious firewood collecting and sweeping up
loose bark and leaves were also recognized as slowing
wildfires at local scales.
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
728 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
Fig. 4. A representation of a journey to a Ngadju gathering as described by Les Schultz.
DISCUSSION
Was Ngadju use of fire frequent and pervasive?
Consistent with our expectations and the established im-
portance of Aboriginal fire in Australia (Bowman 1998;
Gammage 2011), planned fires played and still play a
significant role in Ngadju daily life and land manage-
ment. At the general level, Ngadju referred to at least
52 of the 69 attributes of traditional fire management
itemized by Huffman (2013; Appendix S3), supporting
the proposition that the structure of traditional fire
knowledge is universal.
At the same time, Ngadju use of fire appears highly
distinctive, producing an endemic fire knowledge
(Huffman 2013) characterized not by the promi-
nence of fire typical of many Australian landscapes
(Pyne 1991; Bowman 1998; Gammage 2011), rather
by the selectivity of its use. This selectivity suggests
that Aboriginal burning was less pervasive in the
GWW compared with more mesic or grassy Austra-
lian landscapes (Hallam 1975; Abbott 2003; Silcock
et al. 2013), consistent with the contention that
Aboriginal burning was less prevalent in more arid,
non-grassy landscapes (Hallam 1975; Abbott 2003;
Silcock et al. 2013). In particular, Ngadju indicated
that planned burning in extensive eucalypt wood-
lands and sandplains was occasional and targeted.
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
Further, contrasting with Gammage’s (2011) asser-
tion that ‘Clearly, erratic fire was rare and controlled fire
normal’ (p. 122), large and potentially intense
unplanned fires were accepted by Ngadju as a natural
part of the fire regime, structuring both woodland
and sandplain ecosystems.
Ngadju reports of limited planned burning in wood-
lands concur with the paucity of early historical records
of fire in these woodlands (Appendix S2), and with lim-
ited historical records of Aboriginal burning in other
fire-sensitive ecosystems in Australia, such as those
dominated by mulga (Acacia aneura) (Pyne 1991;
Silcock et al. 2013), river red gum (Eucalyptus
camaldulensis) (Colloff 2014), Callitris intratropica
(Trauernicht et al. 2012) and rainforest (Hill et al.
1999). By contrast, recent syntheses describing
Australian pyromes overlooked the fire-sensitivity of
south-western Australian woodlands, classifying them
as temperate woodland with ‘infrequent low-intensity
litter fires in spring and medium-intensity grass fires in
summer’, ‘no crown fire’ and dominated by resprouters
(Murphy et al. 2013; Clarke et al. 2015). However,
regionally focused research using chronosequence and
modelling approaches has indicated the GWW wood-
lands have a low hazard of burning when mature
(O’Donnell et al. 2011; Gosper et al. 2013a), with infre-
quent (median 310 yearly) crown fires driving their dy-
namics (O’Donnell et al. 2011). Thin bark (e.g. 3 mm
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA
in gimlet, C. Macfarlane unpub. data) and weak
resprouting capacity (Yates et al. 1994) renders trees eas-
ily fire-killed, resulting in dense stands of saplings that
can take 150 years develop a more open, less flammable
structure (Gosper et al. 2013a). This is closely aligned
with Ngadju accounts of relatively fire resistant mature
woodlands, and associated regrowth woodland that is
more flammable and ‘…gets that thick, a kangaroo can’t
get through it’.
In sum, Ngadju burning within woodlands is likely to
have had relatively minor influences on their structure
and composition, e.g. through protection of valued spe-
cies such as quandongs. On the other hand, planned
burning and timber collection focused at woodland
edges, and burning in adjoining vegetation, could have re-
duced the frequency or extent of stand-replacing fires.
The importance of these potential effects, and hence
whether altered Aboriginal management could contribute
to the apparent increase in large, intense wildfires in
GWW woodlands (Watson et al. 2008), remains unclear.
Whilst the GWW woodlands are relatively fire resis-
tant and slow to regrow, sandplain vegetation is highly
flammable and regenerates more rapidly, with contem-
porary fire intervals in southern Australian shrublands
and mallee shrublands estimated in the 14–90+ year
range (O’Donnell et al. 2011; Enright et al. 2012; Gosper
et al. 2013b). Constrained Ngadju fire management re-
ported for these ecosystems is thus more surprising. This
may reflect their extensiveness in relation to Ngadju
population size (‘You gotta walk’), limited resources
(especially water) and preferences for occupying fire-
resistant landscapes. Nevertheless, occasional planned
fires overlain by wildfires would still have led to mosaics
of shrubland of differing fire history and associated
mosaics in plant composition (Gosper et al. 2013b),
particularly along travel routes.
The more predominant concept of frequent Aborigi-
nal burning appears to be applicable to important land-
scape elements of more restricted extent in Ngadju
country. These areas provided valuable resources, con-
sistent with Hallam’s (1975) argument that Aboriginal
burning was most frequent in areas of intense use. Fur-
ther, rockhole vegetation and grasslands support grassy
groundlayers, in accordance with the hypothesis that
grassy ecosystems are an exception to decreasing Ab-
original burning with increasing aridity (Abbott 2003;
Silcock et al. 2013). Indeed the grassy groundlayers are
likely promoted by this frequent burning, evident from
statements such as: ‘The bush is now all scrubby again. It
has always been kept down in the past, even we did that
around the rockholes.’ Similarly, spear grass grasslands
highlighted by Ngadju are not recognized on contempo-
rary vegetation maps (e.g. Beard 1976); lack of frequent
fire in more recent times has possibly led to greater
dominance by low chenopods in some places (S. Prober,
pers. obs.).
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
729
Predictive application of fire and the template
concept
Although planned fire was described as limited or occa-
sional across large expanses of Ngadju country, Ngadju
demonstrated a detailed understanding of the impacts
of fire on key species and landscape elements, and de-
scribed varied application of fire across the landscape.
This suggests that Ngadju have a predictive knowledge
of the ecological consequence of burning (Bowman
1998), consistent with the concept of templates to man-
age resources (Gammage 2011) and indicating subtle
but deliberate regulation of the environment and biota.
First, a remarkable attention to fine-scale detail was
evident. Planned fires involved activities such as remov-
ing litter to safeguard fire-sensitive trees, protecting
water-bearing roots, collecting firewood to control fire
intensity, maintaining unburnt patches for emu and mal-
lee fowl nests and protecting logs as ‘bush larders’ (likely
promoting small mammals, reptiles and invertebrates).
Similarly, impacts of fire were reported for key resource
species, including the well-known benefit of green-pick
for kangaroos, and lesser-known benefits such as
attracting bush turkeys, promoting wild cucumbers,
stimulating flowering and nectar production and, con-
sistent with Parsons and Gosper’s (2011) conclusions
for mallee fowl, recognizing preferences of mallee fowl,
wallabies and Bobtail lizards for unburnt areas. Low fire
intensities to avoid dense germination and promote
open vegetation and living spaces were also emphasized.
Second, a template concept was evident in intensively
used areas (Gammage 2011). This included use of fre-
quent, rotational burning coupled with water resources
at rockholes to maintain localized areas of open vegeta-
tion for day-to-day living. Similarly, Ngadju emphasized
the importance of constraining fire size and combining
woody cover in mosaic with open vegetation to optimize
hunting success (e.g. Fig. 3h).
Finally, at the landscape scale, the differing fire re-
gimes across Ngadju country highlight a diversity in
Ngadju application of fire, and an associated diversity
of resources. Whilst this is consistent with the concept
of template systems linked across landscapes (Gammage
2011), much of this diversity reflects edaphically driven
vegetation patterns (Beard 1990). Deliberate use of dif-
ferent fire regimes to create resource diversity and spatial
structure within relatively homogeneous sandplains or
woodlands, as might be expected in template systems
(Gammage 2011), was not explicitly articulated during
our study, but might be further investigated. For exam-
ple, historical references to ‘small plains and burnt spaces’
throughout extensive scrub could reflect management to
maintain open and dense patches of vegetation (Page
1898); similarly, benefits of burnt versus unburnt vege-
tation for different species and resources were recog-
nized in sandplain shrublands. Further, although
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
730 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
Ngadju expressed a focus on the local purpose of indi-
vidual fires, they suggested that both the fire mosaic
and natural landscape features could help limit fire
spread. The latter is supported by O’Donnell et al.
(2011) who demonstrated substantially lower fire
frequencies in vegetation near salt lakes.
Documenting Aboriginal fire knowledge
The wide-ranging information offered by Ngadju re-
garding their fire knowledge demonstrates the potential
value of living ecological knowledge even where disrup-
tion of Aboriginal ways of life has occurred. In wooded
landscapes of southern Australia, Aboriginal knowledge
is commonly assumed lost, and few detailed contempo-
rary documentations have been attempted (Bowman
1998). Whilst our results likely include influences since
European colonization (Spoon 2014), the rich and de-
tailed accounts Ngadju related clearly reflect local tradi-
tions and experiences, and are largely consistent with
local historical and ecological evidence (Appendix S2,
O’Donnell et al. 2011; Enright et al. 2012; Gosper et al.
2013a, 2013b; Prober et al. 2013).
The workshop setting chosen by Ngadju led to a range
of benefits, despite challenges associated with working
with large groups. Workshops helped piece together
knowledge fragments into a more integrated representa-
tion of Ngadju fire knowledge, and systematic discussion
of different elements of Ngadju country reduced poten-
tial bias towards fire presence. Importantly, Ngadju pre-
ferred a workshop approach because it facilitated
intergenerational knowledge sharing amongst Ngadju.
Similarly, the workshop setting facilitated knowledge
sharing with western fire managers, resulting in continu-
ing active development of a contemporary role for
Ngadju in local fire management.
However, advantages of integrating Ngadju fire knowl-
edge with western fire management are not a fait accompli.
In particular, the process risks western bias in interpreta-
tion, leading to Ngadju ecological knowledge becoming
subservient to western paradigms (Bohensky & Maru
2011). We emphasize that Ngadju viewed this documen-
tation as a basis for their engagement in contemporary
management on their own terms. Consistent with conclu-
sions of Hill et al. (2012) that integration of Aboriginal
and Western knowledge systems is best achieved through
Aboriginal governance or co-governance, Ngadju clearly
expressed a desire to be ‘at the table’ in future manage-
ment negotiations, rather than their documented
knowledge being incorporated by others.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Ngadju fire knowledge fills an important gap in under-
standing Aboriginal fire regimes in southern Australia,
highlighting a novel balance between frequent and
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
constrained use of planned fire. This is likely to have re-
sulted in subtle but purposeful effects on the vegetation
and biota, in landscapes where edaphically driven mo-
saics of fire-resistant and flammable vegetation predom-
inate. Importantly, in looking to the future, Ngadju felt
that re-engagement in fire management could benefit
their country at the same time as offering cultural bene-
fits and livelihoods in land management roles. Notably
they emphasized a desire to ‘combine the best of old and
new ways’, drawing on traditional knowledge for looking
after country but progressing the application of new
technologies in fire management.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper would not have been possible without the
support of the Ngadju Nation who allowed their knowl-
edge to be shared and documented. We gratefully ac-
knowledge the input of community participants Phyllis
Alley, Malcolm Anderson, Kelvin Batty, Nuna Bero,
Gerard bin-Sarin, Annie Dabb, Gary Darlow, Dorothy
Dimer, Carmen Dodd, Clem Donaldson, Gail
Donaldson, James Ellis, Delvene Garlett, Cheyenne
Graham, David Graham, Johnny Graham, John
(Danny) Graham, Justin Graham, Lurlene Graham,
Sonny Graham, Vicki Graham, Damien Green, Alan
Harris, Lucille Jennings, Anthea Johnston, Jaydon John-
ston, Peter Little, Betty Logan, Demi McCall, Eddie
McKenzie, Ronald Nine, Anastacia Nudding, Robyn
Richards, Dianne Rule, Stephen Rule, Valma Saunders,
Gloria Schultz, Jack Schultz, James Schultz, Joselyn
Schultz, Les Schultz, Tiara Schultz, Valma Schultz,
Wendy Schultz, Barry Smith, Bonnie Smith, Colleen
Smith, Ellin Smith, Gavin Smith, Kevin Smith, Loretta
Smith, Matthew Smith, Shakira Smith, Iona Stewart,
Danielle Velickovic, Cheraze Wicker, Jeffrey Wicker,
Kyle Wicker, Phyllis Wicker, Eric Wilson and Veronica
Wyatt; and agency participants Richard Brooks (Dundas
Shire Council), Mac Johnston (Department of Fire and
Emergency Services); Ryan Butler, Laurent Gaillard
and Laurent Marsol (Department of Parks and Wildlife
(DPaW) WA). The Western Australian Government
funded this project through its GWW Strategy, with ad-
ditional support from the GWW Supersite, part of the
Australian Government’s Terrestrial Ecosystem Re-
search Network. We thank GLSC, The Wilderness So-
ciety, DPaW WA and GondwanaLink for helping
establish the project and Darren Forster, Linden
Brownely and Leo Thomas (GLSC) for organizing and
assisting with workshops and field trips. Lachie McCaw,
Ryan Butler and Aminya Ennis (DPaW WA) contrib-
uted to the steering committee; Fiona Walsh, Jocelyn
Davies, Iain Walker and Nat Raisbeck-Brown (CSIRO
Land and Water) advised on project design; Tristan
Fazio (CSIRO, Curtin University) prepared the maps;
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
 NGADJU FIRE KNOWLEDGE IN SOUTH‐WESTERN AUSTRALIA
and Doug Marmion (AIATSIS, Canberra) assisted with
Ngadju language terms.
REFERENCES
Abbott I. (2003) Aboriginal fire regimes in south-west Western
Australia: evidence from historical documents. In: Fire in Eco-
systems of South-West Western Australia: Impacts and
Management (eds I. Abbott & N. Burrows) pp. 119–46.
Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Bates D. M. (about 1908a) “RR Harvey of Dundas”. Ms 365 folio
47/114–120. NLA, Canberra.
Bates D. M. (about 1908b) “RR Harvey of Dundas MSS”. Ms 365
folio 47/128. NLA, Canberra.
Beard J. S. (1990) Plant Life of Western Australia. Kangaroo Press
Pty Ltd, Kenthurst NSW.
Beard J. S. (1976) The Vegetation of the Boorabbin and Lake Johnston
Areas, 1:250,000 series, 2nd edn. Vegmap Publications, Perth,
Vegetation Survey of Western Australia.
Beard J. S., Beeston G. R., Harvey J. M., Hopkins A. J. M. & Shep-
herd D. P. (2013) The vegetation of Western Australia at the
1:3,000,000 scale. Second edition. Conservation Science Western
Australia 9, 1–230.
Benson J. S. & Redpath P. A. (1997) The nature of pre-European
vegetation in south eastern Australia: a critique of Ryan, D.
G., Ryan, J. R. and Starr, B. J. (1995) The Australian land-
scape – observations of explorers and early settlers.
Cunninghamia 5, 285–328.
Bird D. W., Bird R. B. & Parker C. H. (2005) Aboriginal burning
regimes and hunting strategies in Australia’s Western Desert.
Hum. Ecol. 33, 443–64.
Bohensky E. L. & Maru Y. (2011) Indigenous knowledge, science,
and resilience: what have we learned from a decade of interna-
tional literature on “integration”? Ecol. Soc. 16, 6.
Bowman D. M. J. S. (1998) The impact of Aboriginal landscape
burning on the Australian biota. New Phytol. 140, 385–410.
Bowman D. M. J. S., Walsh A. & Prior L. D. (2004) Landscape
analysis of Aboriginal fire management in Central Arnhem
Land, north Australia. J. Biogeogr. 31, 207–23.
Burrows N. D. & Christensen P. E. S. (1991) A survey of Aborigi-
nal fire patterns in the western desert of Australia. In: Fire and
the Environment: Ecological and Cultural Perspectives: Proceedings
of an International Symposium: Knoxville, Tennessee, March 20–
24, 1990 (eds S. C. Nodvin & T. A. Waldrop) pp. 297–305.
USDA Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville.
Bureau of Meteorology (2015) www.bom.gov.au, accessed 26 No-
vember 2015.
Carey, H. S. (1877) Surveyor Field Book 4. Survey Office: Surveyor
field books; SROWA, WAS 32, Cons 3401, CARE/04.
Christianson A. (2015) Social science research on Indigenous wild-
fire management in the 21st century and future research needs.
Int. J. Wildland Fire 24, 190–200.
Clarke P. J., Lawes M. J., Murphy B. P., et al. (2015) Postfire recov-
ery traits of woody plants in Australian ecosystems: a
continental synthesis for predicting the effects of changing fire
regimes. Science of the Total Environment 534, 31–42.
Colloff M. J. (2014) Flooded Forest and Desert Creek. Ecology and His-
tory of the River Red Gum. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.
Cook G. D., Jackson S. & Williams R. J. (2012) A revolution in
northern Australian fire management: recognition of Indige-
nous knowledge, practice and management. In: Flammable
Australia: Fire Regimes, Biodiversity and Ecosystems in a Changing
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia
731
World (eds R. A. Bradstock, A. M. Gill & R. J. Williams) pp.
293–305. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.
Enright N. J., Keith D. A., Clarke M. F. & Miller B. P. (2012) Aus-
tralian sclerophyllous shrubby ecosystems: heathlands, heathy
woodlands and mallee woodlands. In: Flammable Australia:
Fire Regimes, Biodiversity and Ecosystems in a Changing World
(eds R. A. Bradstock, A. M. Gill & R. J. Williams) pp.
215–34. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.
Fensham R. (1997) Aboriginal fire regimes in Queensland, Austra-
lia: analysis of the explorers’ record. J. Biogeogr. 24, 11–22.
Fitzsimons J., Russell-Smith J., James G., et al. (2012) Insights
into the biodiversity and social benchmarking components
of the Northern Australian fire management and carbon
abatement programmes. Ecological Management and
Restoration 13, 51–7.
Gammage B. (2008) Plain facts: Tasmania under aboriginal man-
agement. Landscape Research 33, 241–54.
Gammage B. (2011) The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines
Made Australia. Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Garde M., Nadjamerrek B. L., Kolkkiwarra M., et al. (2009) The
language of fire: seasonality, resources and landscape burning
on the Arnhem Land Plateau. In: Culture, Ecology and Economy
of Fire Management in North Australian Savannas: Rekindling the
Wurrk Tradition (eds J. Russell-Smith, P. Whitehead & P.
Cooke) pp. 85–180. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Gosper C., Prober S. M. & Yates C. J. (2013a) Multi-century
changes in vegetation structure and fuel availability in fire-
sensitive eucalypt woodlands. Forest Ecol. Manag. 310, 102–9.
Gosper C., Prober S. M. & Yates C. J. (2013b) Estimating fire inter-
val bounds using vital attributes: implications of uncertainty and
among-population variability. Ecol. Appl. 23, 924–35.
Gott B. (2005) Aboriginal fire management in south-eastern
Australia: aims and frequency. J. Biogeogr. 32, 1203–8.
Hallam S. J. (1975) Fire and Hearth. A Study of Aboriginal Usage
and European Usurpation in South-western Australia. Austra-
lian Aboriginal Studies No. 58. Australian Institute of
Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.
Hill R., Baird A. & Buchanan D. (1999) Aborigines and fire in the
wet tropics of Queensland, Australia: ecosystem management
across cultures. Soc. Natur. Resour. 12, 205–23.
Hill R., Grant C., George M., Robinson C. J., Jackson S. & Abel N.
(2012) A typology of Indigenous engagement in Australian en-
vironmental management: implications for knowledge
integration and social–ecological system sustainability. Ecol.
Soc. 17, 23.
Hobbs R. J. & Yates C. J. (2000) Temperate Eucalypt Woodlands in
Australia. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.
Huffman M. R. (2013) The many elements of traditional fire
knowledge: synthesis, classification and aids to cross-cultural
problem solving in fire-dependent systems around the world.
Ecol. Soc. 18, 3.
Jurskis V. (2009) River red gum and white cypress forests in south-
western New South Wales, Australia: ecological history and
implications for conservation of grassy woodlands. Forest Ecol.
Manag. 258, 2593–601.
McCarter J., Gavin M. C., Baereleo S. & Love M. (2014) The chal-
lenges of maintaining indigenous ecological knowledge. Ecol.
Soc. 19, 39.
Mooney S. D., Harrison S. P., Bartlein P. J., et al. (2011) Late
Quaternary fire regimes of Australasia. Quaternary Science
Rev. 30, 28–46.
Murphy B. P., Bradstock R. A., Boer M. M., et al. (2013) Fire
regimes of Australia: a pyrogeographic model system.
J. Biogeogr. 40, 1048–58.
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
732 S . M . P R O B E R ET AL.
O’Connor M. H. & Prober S. M. (2010) A Calendar of Ngadju Sea-
sonal Knowledge. Report to the Ngadju Community and Working
Group. CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, Perth.
O’Donnell A. J., Boer M. M., McCaw W. L. & Grierson P. F.
(2011) Vegetation and landscape connectivity control wildfire
intervals in unmanaged semi-arid shrublands and woodlands
in Australia. J. Biogeogr 38, 112–24.
Page, H. J. (1898) The Rabbit Invasion. Report by Mr H. J. Page.
His proposed line of fence. In: The West Australian [newspaper]
(Apr. 8), p. 2.
Parsons B. C. & Gosper C. R. (2011) Contemporary fire regimes in
a fragmented and an unfragmented landscape: implications for
vegetation structure and persistence of the fire-sensitive
malleefowl. Int. J. Wildland Fire 20, 184–94.
Preece N. (2007) Traditional and ecological fires and effects of
bushfire laws in north Australian savannas. Int. J. Wildland Fire
16, 378–9.
Preece N. D. (2013) Tangible evidence of historic Australian
indigenous savanna management. Austral Ecol. 38, 241–50.
Prober S. M., Thiele K. R., Rundell P., et al. (2012) Climate adap-
tation in intact landscapes: a framework for managing change
and resilience applied to the world’s largest temperate wood-
land. Climatic Change 110, 227–48.
Prober S. M., Yuen E., O’Connor M. & Schultz L. (2013) Ngadju
Kala: Ngadju Fire Knowledge and Contemporary Fire Manage-
ment in the Great Western Woodlands. CSIRO Ecosystem
Sciences, Floreat, WA.
Pyne S. J. (1991) Burning Bush. A Fire History of Australia. Henry
Holt and Co., New York, USA.
Roe J. S. (1849) Surveyor Field Book 8. Survey Office: Surveyor
field books; SROWA, WAS 32, Cons 3401, ROEJ/8.
Russell-Smith J., Lucas D., Gapindi M., et al. (1997) Aboriginal
resource utilization and fire management practice in West-
ern Arnhem Land, monsoonal northern Australia: notes
for prehistory, lessons for the future. Human Ecol. 25,
159–95.
Silcock J. L., Piddocke T. P. & Fensham R. J. (2013) Illuminating
the dawn of pastoralism: evaluating the record of European
doi:10.1111/aec.12377
explorers to inform landscape change. Biol. Conserv. 159,
321–31.
Spoon J. (2014) Quantitative, qualitative, and collaborative
methods: approaching indigenous ecological knowledge het-
erogeneity. Ecol. Soc. 19, 33.
Trauernicht C., Murphy B. P., Portner T. E. & Bowman D. (2012)
Tree cover–fire interactions promote the persistence of a fire-
sensitive conifer in a highly flammable savanna. J. Ecol. 100,
958–68.
Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Centre (2009)
Ngajumaya Dictionary. English–Ngajumaya Wordlist and Topical
Wordlists, 2009 edn. Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Lan-
guage Centre in agreement with Karlkurla Language and
Cultural Aboriginal Corporation, Port Hedland.
Watson A., Judd S., Watson S., Lam A. & Mackenzie D. (2008)
The Extraordinary Nature of the Great Western Woodlands. The
Wilderness Society, Perth.
Yates C. J., Hobbs R. J. & Bell R. W. (1994) Landscape-scale dis-
turbances and regeneration in semi-arid woodlands of
southwestern Australia. Pac. Conserv. Biol. 1, 214–21.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Additional supporting information may be found in the
online version of this article at the publisher’s web site:
Appendix S1. Glossary of common, Ngadju and latin
names for plants, animals, seasons, Aboriginal groups
and other terms referred to in this paper.
Appendix S2. Early historical records of fire in Ngadju
landscapes.
Appendix S3. Universal elements of traditional fire
knowledge.
Appendix S4. Stories of the sandplain.
© 2016 Ecological Society of Australia