By Jeremy Sollars
A council submission on the 2019 bushfires in the region to the Royal Commission on National Natural Disaster Arrangements has raised issues over emergency alerts and future housing development in rural residential zones.
The submission was signed off by councillors at their May general meeting last week and has been forwarded to the Royal Commission, which was established in February in response to the “extreme bushfire season of 2019-2020”.
It is due to deliver a final report by the end of August this year.
The Southern Downs Regional Council’s submission presents a view of what it considers to be ‘lessons learned’ from the bushfires, noting strong partnerships between local agencies, volunteers and emergency services, and notes there were “no injuries or loss of life” in our region.
It also notes the challenge to firefighters posed by the drought but that “alternative water sources were identified and sourced by council and emergency services to negate the need to use scare town water supplies”.
But the submission also refers to what council officers consider was “confusion” over some of the warnings issued to residents when fires were threatening settled areas, and also recommends restrictions on future housing in “bushfire-prone” parts of the region.
Specifically, the submission recommends that “areas such as those impacted by the Stanthorpe bushfire in September 2019 should not be subject to new residential development including rural residential”.
The submission also states that landowners “generally lack knowledge in how to manage their land to reduce fuel loads, particularly in the face of a changing climate and altered fire regimes”.
“Controlled burning is ad hoc and piece meal at best when considering bushfire risk mitigation at the landscape scale,” the submission states.
“Traditional land and fire management practices of Indigenous Australians should be incorporated into training practices that are made widely available to landowners, regardless of the way in which they use their land.”
KEY POINTS FROM THE SUBMISSION…
“Alerts – a level of confusion exists in the community as to the messaging contained in emergency alerts. ‘Watch and Act’ alerts advising residents to ‘leave now’ caused confusion.
“Resource management – critical water shortages across the Southern Downs meant that access to water for firefighting purposes was a very real concern, particularly as drinking water supplies are typically drawn upon for firefighting.
“Evacuation –
• Some confusion resulted from there being two evacuation centres and alert messaging at times conflicted with the status of the New England Highway for travel.
• Well-meaning community organisations advertised the availability of their grounds for evacuees and their domestic animals, which confused evacuation messaging.
• Evacuation centre facilities were found to be lacking in some areas, particularly the lack of a back-up power supply to the Stanthorpe centre.
“Recovery –
• Some residents were unable or unwilling to leave their home to attend the community hub to access recovery assistance information. Illustrating gaps in the provision of information to impacted residents, a joint visit by QRA (Queensland Reconstruction Authority) and council staff six months on from the Stanthorpe bushfires revealed that a resident whose property was directly impacted had not received any support or contact from any level of government since the bushfires occurred.
• Existing agency funding and loans packages were used for business recovery, rather than tailoring specific packages that catered to the impacts of the bushfires. This resulted in reduced uptake by business due to incompatible eligibility criteria.
• Some residents did not identify with the names that were used to describe locations, so they missed out on funding packages or help. For example an overall suburb name was used rather than the smaller discrete township or locality names which locals would use and know.
• A lack of data on biodiversity condition meant it was not possible to accurately measure the level of impact on the natural environment which confounded planning for recovery.
• Long delays in time between commitments for funding and the delivery/execution of funding agreements meant that several opportunities to harness recovery efforts dissipated.
Recommendations –
• Alerts – emergency alerts need to be localised to illustrate the location of the fire front in order for residents to gain a better understanding of the proximity of the fire. Messaging in emergency alerts need to be consistent and simplified so residents better understand the intent of the alert.
• Landowners generally lack knowledge in how to manage their land to reduce fuel loads, particularly in the face of a changing climate and altered fire regimes. Controlled burning is ad hoc and piece meal at best when considering bushfire risk mitigation at the landscape scale. Traditional land and fire management practices of Indigenous Australians should be incorporated into training practices that are made widely available to landowners, regardless of the way in which they use their land.
• Mapping of firebreaks needs to be improved and contemporised. Coordination of data held by different agencies needs to be centralised and shared.
Planning –
• Better planning needs to occur in areas of high bushfire risk. Areas such as those impacted by the Stanthorpe bushfire in September 2019 should not be subject to new residential development including rural residential. Roads should not be constructed in these areas, ie a no-through road up a heavily treed hill, adjoining an extensive State forestry. Further cul-de-sacs should also not be permitted to be constructed from this no through road, as doing so only increased the number of residences which are subject to a potential impact, with no alternative access routes. Any cul-de-sacs in these areas should also be reduced in length, to reduce the nature of the impact and ability to be aware of the situation at hand. Existing areas of high bushfire risk, where there is only one route in and out, should be provided with a lawful, alternative route, which is passable by a passenger vehicle.
• A full reticulated water supply should be provided to all rural residential properties, particularly where they are subject to a high bushfire risk. Where reticulated water isn’t available or the property is within the Rural zone, then an appropriate water storage, only for firefighting purposes, should be available, ie a tank fitted with the appropriate couplings, which cannot be used for residential supply.
• Appropriate fire breaks should be established, maintained and protected around any existing areas of high density rural residential development, where they adjoin State Forest, by the responsible State agency.
• READ MORE AT – naturaldisaster.royalcommission.gov.au
