Fire Rating an absolute nonsense

Hi Willem.

Sometimes they just don't think about what they put out into the media.

Also possibly an insight into the professionalism of those involved.

regards

Yep - that political exercise brought a smile or two here as well ! I think the fact is that the "whole mega fire risk" thing is nothing new to the CFS and most thinking residents at risk - they would all have realised that at times of crisis, lots of people could well be left to their own devices. It's just that as a result of the Vic horror last year, the authorities now have to stick a label on that scenario and talk about it.... to save their own hides ? :-o).

I think this is an exercise in trying to avoid legal responsibility in our litigation crazy society. It is yet to be tested in Vic as to whether or not, by not ordereing evacuation, the government or instrumentalities may or may not be responsible for losses. Clearly evacuations on this scale with the number of ultra hot days we are getting and can expect to get even more of, are not practical for any government to organize. So by advising that people should evacuate on days with this rating, the government covers themselves. It is difficult to see what else they can do. Apart from banning people from living in high risk areas and compensating those who have to be moved out. Imagine how popular that would be.

Enjoy the Nannie state, we voted for it..

My belief is that announcements like that tells the lunatics to go light a fire.

.

Why are people reading evacuations and ranting and raving about them?

Victoria is not ordering any evacuations! Is South Australia ordering them, or are they saying “if your fire plan includes evacuation you should evacuate tonight”

The CFA is most explicit in its recommendations:
The safest option is always to leave before bushfire threatens and your personal safety must be your top priority. You should leave early if:
You are not adequately prepared to defend your property
You are on your own. Active defence should only be considered when there are at least two fit adults
You are not physically or emotionally prepared to actively defend your home
You do not have a Bushfire Survival Plan
You have children, elderly or vulnerable people in your home
Everyone should consider leaving on days of Code Red (Catastrophic) fire danger even if you feel well prepared as it may be impossible to successfully defend your home under these conditions.
When should I leave?
If your Bushfire Survival Plan entails leaving before fire threatens, there are three distinct options. You need to consider that two of them could put your life at risk.
Leave early in the day of Severe or Extreme fire rated days, if you live in a bushfire prone area. On a Code Red (Catastrophic) rated fire danger days, the safest option is to leave the night before, or early in the morning
Leave when you are alerted to fire in your area. This contains some risk
Leave when a fire is close to your home. This is the most dangerous option and could be fatal
Please consider these options very seriously when you are developing your Bushfire Survival Plan as your life may depend on it.

These are recommendations only. I assume all those claiming hidden agendas have developed their own have a Bushfire Survival Plan that does not include leaving. These plans are obviously based on a realistic appraisal of their knowledge, experience or abilities

The CFA and CFS must be bashing their heads against the wall

If your fire plan is to stay, stay. If your fire plan is to go, go early. Don't expect some firefighter to put their life on the line to save yours

Living very close to one of Victoria's Feb 7th fires I can understand why they are upping the warning ante to these levels. Over here it was never a case of fire-fighters not wanting to fight the fires but a case of they just couldn't. All they could do was put in control lines along it's flanks as no-one could get in front of it. I agree that advising people to leave when there isn't a fire is over the top but having seen the devastation and ferocity of February's fires in Victoria I can understand why they are going to these lengths.

We have 11 less locals than last year because no-one understood how bad the situation really was until their home was on fire. Plenty lost their lives in their cars while trying to flee when it was far too late. Maybe the over the top warnings will save some lives this year.

I agree with Willem, it is a crazy knee jerk reaction, schools closing just in case ... how ridiculous!
All it does is put working parents under more pressure.

It's OK Willem, don't get upset.

Kevin Krudd & our fearless NSW premier will offer yet another apology in the near future.

And all will be serene & well in the world once again & we will all live happily ever after. LOL

.....and what are we to do with all the old folk in Nursing Homes, move them out for a day out? Some places have well over a 100 people in care with bush all around the place. Don't like my chances when I'm old!

READ or LISTEN to the message. DO not interperet incorrectly what you think the message is telling you.

Take note of the phrase "IF YOU LIVE IN A BUSHFIRE PRONE AREA".

Clearly if you live in a town, in the centre of town, in a house surrounded by a fence, surrounded by other houses, and do not have a fuel load, then you probably don't have an Evacuation Plan, because your own Risk Assesment has decreed that, ie you are not in a BUSHFIRE PRONE AREA.

Conversely if you live on a property or the fringes of a town where your home is at risk, because your own Risk Assesment highlighted fuel load which could present a hazard to you, then ou have an Evacuation Plan, then heed the advice of the warnings.

It is not a carte blanche invitation for all 1400 residents of a population of 1400 to evacuate, this is not nescessary. Where would you go that is safer? Although from this population 0f 1400, if you are one of the 250-300 on the fringes of town or on a property surrounded by straw, dead grass, trees, then your own Risk Assesment will tell you that you need to be ready to react, and evacuate.


regards,
Dion.

Settle down boys (and girls) the authorities are NOT telling you or any to leave your homes. Someone on radio or elsewhere in the media MAY have said that but it isn't then intention of the fire warnings. It really all comes down to the individual making their own decisions in conjunction with their fire plan and warnings as issued by Weather Bureau and Fire Service. If they believe that they can stay and defend their homes/properties then that's their decision however if they don't believe they can do that (protect their property and lives) then they should decide to leave early to a safe place. What is a safe place ? That is something that individuals and communities have to decide for themselves.

Read this LINK for specific, no hype or spin explanation of 'the facts'.

If you don't want to be misled by journalists, here are the actual words published by the CFS -

CFS Fact Sheet Fire Danger Rating

"CATASTROPHIC FDI 100+
ACTION: For your survival, leaving is the best option.

Fires will be uncontrollable, unpredictable and fast moving. Flames will be higher than roof tops.
Thousands of embers will be blown around. Spot fires will move quickly and come from many
directions, up to 20 km ahead of the fire.

There is a very high likelihood that people in the path of the fire will die or be injured. Thousands
of homes and businesses will be destroyed.

House construction standards do not go beyond a Fire Danger Index of 100.

Well prepared, constructed and actively defended homes may not be safe during a fire."

"EXTREME FDI 75-99
ACTION: Leaving is the safest option for your survival.

Fires will be uncontrollable, unpredictable and fast moving. Flames will be higher than roof tops.
Thousands of embers will be blown around. Spot fires will move quickly and come from many
directions, up to 6 km ahead of the fire.

There is a likelihood that people in the path of the fire will die and be injured. Hundreds of homes
will be destroyed.

Only well prepared, well constructed and actively defended houses are likely to offer safety during
a fire."

Any suggestions on how this could be improved to give people who never been through a nightmare bushfire, understand what conditions will be like so that they make sound decisions before it's too late ?

It is kind of hard to see just what else the government can do. Clearly there is no way they can evacuate, even less "forcibly evacuate", areas where there is a potential threat. For every potential catastrophic day, only a very small number will actually result in major fires. But no-one knows which days or where. So what else can a government do?
In effect, this is the opposite of the "nanny state". We are being told that the forecast and fuel conditions have the potential for uncontrollable, very fast moving fires to which getting out of the area may be the only answer, for some. How each individual chooses to respond to this information is up to them. We need to make our own assessment of our own situation.
The problem in Vic was that too many had been led to believe that staying to defend the property was a viable choice. It wasn't.

It seems this fire rsting doesn't take into account the fuel type, surely a grass fire is going to be different to a forrest fire given the same weather conditions?


The key though is to just be prepared, there's no use 'running' from a potential fire, how far would you have to go? & which way would you go?


If your prepared, an you get the news of a fire you can leave, in the best direction, very quickly....


What could a school do if it came under attack by a fire on a Catastrophic rated day? - not enough I would suggest :(

Seems to me any mandatory evacuation is all totally unenforcable.

Who would enforce it? Not the police...not enough of them to scratch the cattle & sheep duffers and dope growers. Not the fireries...too busy fighting the fires and otherwise getting n with their lives.

This is probably why enforced evacuations would be not legislated.

The most you could be pinged for would be failing to obey the directions of a police officer...and most sensibly they probably wouldn't bother stopping you if you were so stupid as not to follow a reasobale request.

I agree with Willem. The carte blanche adoption of Victoria's scheme without consideration of local factors is not well thought out...a bit of a knee jerk reaction perhaps.

While rating the risk nad alerting folk is sensible, the management of the risk and any fires needs to be tailored to the local circumstances.

Yeah...and where the...do you evacuated to?
Who is going to tell which way to run?
Where, in any given region do you evacuate to, if the whole region is under the same fire risk?

As someone who lives in WA a state that has a forest fuel load reduction burn policy in place regardless of the"Greenie" fringe and actively promotes a fire prevention plan for all householders in bushfire prone areas may I humbly suggest that taking a few simple precautions long before a fire even starts may not be a bad idea.
How about removing combustible material from your house and outbuildings for a reasonable distance
Not building your house at the top of a slope covered with nice thick bush without a wide firebreak so you have some chance to backburn if threatened by wildfire.
If you must live in such an area use some common sense and don't wait until the fire is galloping up the slope to make the descision to leave

Willem,
A typical bureaucrat B/S solution. They would not no if they had a train up their rear end until the people started getting out. Just imagine the chaos if people took notice of what they advised. Lets give a bit of credit to peoples common sense who live in the Country areas. Never ceases to amaze me what these clowns come up with so they can say , We told you so.
Duke

What does your own personal fire plan suggest that you do ?

Have you prepared your home and are you prepared to stay and defend it in a fire ?

Have you ignored the warnings and do you live in a fire trap ?

The government is giving you the information

What you decide to do with it is up to you.

===========================================




The CFA is most explicit in its recommendations:
The safest option is always to leave before bushfire threatens and your personal safety must be your top priority. You should leave early if:
You are not adequately prepared to defend your property
You are on your own. Active defence should only be considered when there are at least two fit adults
You are not physically or emotionally prepared to actively defend your home
You do not have a Bushfire Survival Plan
You have children, elderly or vulnerable people in your home
Everyone should consider leaving on days of Code Red (Catastrophic) fire danger even if you feel well prepared as it may be impossible to successfully defend your home under these conditions.
When should I leave?
If your Bushfire Survival Plan entails leaving before fire threatens, there are three distinct options. You need to consider that two of them could put your life at risk.
Leave early in the day of Severe or Extreme fire rated days, if you live in a bushfire prone area. On a Code Red (Catastrophic) rated fire danger days, the safest option is to leave the night before, or early in the morning
Leave when you are alerted to fire in your area. This contains some risk
Leave when a fire is close to your home. This is the most dangerous option and could be fatal
Please consider these options very seriously when you are developing your Bushfire Survival Plan as your life may depend on it.

These are recommendations only. I assume all those claiming hidden agendas have developed their own have a Bushfire Survival Plan that does not include leaving. These plans are obviously based on a realistic appraisal of their knowledge, experience or abilities

The CFA and CFS must be bashing their heads against the wall

If your fire plan is to stay, stay. If your fire plan is to go, go early. Don't expect some firefighter to put their life on the line to save yours

Where to go during catastrophic bushfire danger.

Here are CFA Guidelines for Neighbourhood Safe Places

"Places of Last Resort During a Bushfire

The Neighbourhood Safer Place should meet the following criteria:
Specific Criteria
1) Neighbourhood Safer Places should provide a safer level of protection for people from lethal levels of radiant heat by providing an appropriate separation distance between fire hazards, particularly vegetation and the site of the Neighbourhood Safer Place. Such an appropriate separation distance may include isolated fire hazards, an example may be an individual tree as long as such hazards do not add to a fires rate of spread nor influence the radiant heat impacting on the Neighbourhood Safer Place.

If a Neighbourhood Safer Place is an open space, the appropriate separation distance should be greater than 310 metres (*) from the outer edge of the NSP to the fire hazard or should be prescribed to ensure the maximum potential radiant heat impacting on the site is no more than 2kw/m² (**).

If a Neighbourhood Safer Place is a building, the appropriate separation distance should be greater than 140 metres (*) from the outer edge of the building to the fire hazard or should be prescribed to ensure that the maximum potential radiant heat impacting on the building is no more than 10kw/m² (**).

NOTE: The appropriate separation distances as prescribed relate to locations where extreme fuel hazards adjoin the Neighbourhood Safer Place. It is recognised that in certain situations this separation distance could be reduced and still fall inside the radiant heat criteria as specified above.

* The lengths are to assist in providing some initial direction to CFA staff and others of the suitability of potential suitable Neighbourhood safer places,

** The consideration of the radiant heat measures is based on fire industry collaboration of suitable criteria for a safer place. It is based on the view however that each Neighbourhood Safer Place needs to be assessed on its merits and should be calculated according to an appropriate assessment tool."

Damned if they do.

damned if they dont


Col

Maybe the issue is not so much having a catostrphic rating but also areas

There are and always have been far worse fires than the black saturday fires and also far worse conditions than that day in Vic

But they either dont occur in populated areas or in areas where the terrain/vegetation wont support catostrophic fires.

the big pity is its now on everyones minds and maybe next year and perhaps the year after but then the media move on to the next "big thing"

It was 26 years between ash wednesday and black saturday