[Just Rick]

I  have been watching the news tonight,It is now reported Fifty homes have been lost,fifty families displaced,terrible situation,as it is in any fire situation.

A huge thank you too those Full time and Volunteer fight fighters,the volunteer support groups and anyone who has been helping in this situation.

I haven't got much,but I have made a donation,my thoughts and prayers go out to these families who have lost everything.

The fires have been reported as contained,but still not fully under control.

[Dazzler]

If Australia keeps getting hotter, particularly on the mainland, fires are just going to get more common and worse I fear. 

After all the flooding and stuff last year now there are places in bad drought again....

I know Oz has always had this cycle but it seems to be getting worse .. I'm no climate change skeptic! 

[Just Rick]

Yes Dazz,I have lived in Beverley now for nigh on 30 years and have seen the weather patterns change drastically,especially in the last decade,when I first moved here our annual rainfall was between 18 to 21 inches,we are extremely lucky now to see 10 inches per year.

And yes I have also noticed the fire seasons are getting longer,hotter and when we have fires they seem to be much worse than the last disaster,I was a volunteer fight fighter for 19 years and seen many fires,worse I saw was the Brookton,Pingelly,Yearlering fires, the crew I was on was the one to find the young girl who did not heed the advice to stay in Pingelly where she was working and tried to get back to Brookton to make sure her horse was OK,not a very nice sight,along with the thousands of animals we had to clean up.

These days I can now only imagine what all these people are going through,I'm not longer able to go within cooee of a fire these days.

[Dazzler]

I can understand that Rick 

[eye30]

I  have been watching the news tonight,It is now reported Fifty homes have been lost,fifty families displaced,terrible situation,as it is in any fire situation.

Full reinstatement for a loss of property must cost insurance  companies $$$$$$$.

So are people who live in high risk area for fires able to get insurance cover at a reasonable price or do they have to carry the cost?

[Surferdude]

I  have been watching the news tonight,It is now reported Fifty homes have been lost,fifty families displaced,terrible situation,as it is in any fire situation.

Full reinstatement for a loss of property must cost insurance  companies $$$$$$$.

So are people who live in high risk area for fires able to get insurance cover at a reasonable price or do they have to carry the cost?

I don't know the answer to that but I do know that State Govenments are altering their building codes to include a heap of "bush fire proofing" requirements for bushfire prone areas. I saw recently where people who've lost their homes in the last few fires can't afford to rebuild because their insurance payout is based on th evalue of the house as it was and the new regs need another $100,000 or so worth of extras.
That's sad, but I can understand the need for the new rules.
Similar situations exist in cyclone prone areas of the north of this country.

[Phil №❶]

Our council is implementing fines for plants too close to your home. In a residential area I think it's plain ridiculous, but in heavily timbered bush fire prone areas, a good idea. There are thousands of homes built in our picturesque hills that should never have been allowed to be built at all. To compound the problem, residents are blissfully unaware or reluctant to make any concessions to bush fire proofing their homes. When the fire comes through, you and I are expected to foot the bill.

Tall trees are an invitation to loose your home and as nice as they might be, are not appropriate plants to have within 50 metres of your home. Every bush property should have a fire pump system with sprinklers AND ENOUGH WATER to feed them. Council planners here have adopted a park like scenario with gums and permanent wetland catchments which provide a lovely community area for picnics and wildlife observation, but we still have houses with gums far too close, unfortunately. We have shrubs and mains water, so we feel quite secure about fire now, not so in our last home though.

[Just Rick]

Our council is implementing fines for plants too close to your home. In a residential area I think it's plain ridiculous, but in heavily timbered bush fire prone areas, a good idea. There are thousands of homes built in our picturesque hills that should never have been allowed to be built at all. To compound the problem, residents are blissfully unaware or reluctant to make any concessions to bush fire proofing their homes. When the fire comes through, you and I are expected to foot the bill.

Tall trees are an invitation to loose your home and as nice as they might be, are not appropriate plants to have within 50 metres of your home. Every bush property should have a fire pump system with sprinklers AND ENOUGH WATER to feed them. Council planners here have adopted a park like scenario with gums and permanent wetland catchments which provide a lovely community area for picnics and wildlife observation, but we still have houses with gums far too close, unfortunately. We have shrubs and mains water, so we feel quite secure about fire now, not so in our last home though.

All excellent Ideas Phil,but with the sprinkler and water feed situation,especially the amount of water to fight a fire for even fifteen minutes would be nigh on impossible for the average home,unless they were hooked up to and using mains water,10,000 litres fed through two 30mm hoses,fed by a high pressure stalker  pump continually is lucky to last five minutes,but yes a lot can be done to assist in the fire proofing of homes,the removal or non fitting of gutters would be the best start.

Example it was not more than three weeks ago I got on the roof and pressure cleaned my gutters out(I'm in a town site,not bush.I only have a few trees around the house which we planted years ago,yesterday I got up there to inspect,you guessed it absolutely chockers full again,I could just imagine people in the hills and yes like you say until this sort of thing happens people are so blissfully naive about how bush-fires can spread and move at phenomenal speed

[FatBoy]

I hate to disagree, Phil, but I believe if you go down that path then you are getting more and more into the "nanny state".  Inform people of what the consequences are, and let them make the choice.  I believe it's the same with insurance, if you don't have it, don't expect the government and people that do have it to fork out for you.  Also expect to pay more insurance if you are in a bushfire prone area.

IIRC, Rick, didn't the CFA/RFS/etc used to say to block your gutters and fill them with water to protect against ember attack?  By all means, ensure they are cleaned prior to the bushfire season.

I have a friend who has a property in a bushfire prone area near Jervis Bay.  He had his pool as a water supply with petrol powered pumps connected to sprinklers on the roof and around the property.  It wasn't planned to last long, just protect during the worst of it.  There was a property in WA that had all of the sprinklers and stuff connected, but to electric pumps.  The power went out, they lost the pumps, and the house.

[Just Rick]

I hate to disagree, Phil, but I believe if you go down that path then you are getting more and more into the "nanny state".  Inform people of what the consequences are, and let them make the choice.  I believe it's the same with insurance, if you don't have it, don't expect the government and people that do have it to fork out for you.  Also expect to pay more insurance if you are in a bushfire prone area.

IIRC, Rick, didn't the CFA/RFS/etc used to say to block your gutters and fill them with water to protect against ember attack?  By all means, ensure they are cleaned prior to the bushfire season.

I have a friend who has a property in a bushfire prone area near Jervis Bay.  He had his pool as a water supply with petrol powered pumps connected to sprinklers on the roof and around the property.  It wasn't planned to last long, just protect during the worst of it.  There was a property in WA that had all of the sprinklers and stuff connected, but to electric pumps.  The power went out, they lost the pumps, and the house.

Right on all accounts Jamie,yes bit of a silly system,have all the gear and then rely on electric pumps(well unless you have  generator)

[Phil №❶]

We had 75 K Litres, a fire pump, hose and sprinklers at our last home. The correct sprinklers will assist in fire retardation without using massive quantities of water. The theory of fires is that they travel quickly and wetting foliage before the fire arrives and cooling your roof, assist greatly with retardation. My drains were kept clean and the water from the roof which was quite voluminous, was returned to the fire tank after filtering, to be reused again. It was not used for drinking etc. Fortunately, never had to face the WA situation while we were there. I was always going to remain with the fire hose to cater for spot fire or any other eventuality. Window furnishings facing the wooded area, were fibreglass woven vertical drapes, impervious to fire.

[Lakes]

New South Wales, changed the laws, as councils made it hard for people to remove tree's that were a fire risk, the councils had big fines, if you got caught. but after the devastating fires late last year, the state government took over. now its ok to remove tree that are close to a house in fire risk area's.

what about Floods , we have had some bad one's too.

my thought's are with the people of WA Fires, wish i could help.

[Surferdude]

New South Wales, changed the laws, as councils made it hard for people to remove tree's that were a fire risk, the councils had big fines, if you got caught. but after the devastating fires late last year, the state government took over. now its ok to remove tree that are close to a house in fire risk area's.

When we lived in Castle Hill (Sydney) we had gums in the front yard and a  massive one at the back of the house. It used to shed some pretty big branches in storms - and at other times, just to keep us on our toes.
In those days you were allowed (after making application to the council) to remove about 1/3 of the tree.
When we got permission, our neighbour suggested we remove the bottom third. 

[Phil №❶]

Good idea. 

[Just Rick]

New South Wales, changed the laws, as councils made it hard for people to remove tree's that were a fire risk, the councils had big fines, if you got caught. but after the devastating fires late last year, the state government took over. now its ok to remove tree that are close to a house in fire risk area's.

When we lived in Castle Hill (Sydney) we had gums in the front yard and a  massive one at the back of the house. It used to shed some pretty big branches in storms - and at other times, just to keep us on our toes.
In those days you were allowed (after making application to the council) to remove about 1/3 of the tree.
When we got permission, our neighbour suggested we remove the bottom third. 

Now I'd like to see that done