This is not the issue – but it would appear that a turf war broke out between the CFA and the MMFB today and I have the pictures to prove it.
Here is the incident page for the CFA website – notice the RED squares? – you will see to the far right – that is the advice (after it was contained) it clearly says “Doncaster East” and yet below it clearly says Warrandyte. So is there two fires or are they one in the same? (noting that NO reference on the incidents page to Doncaster other than the "Advice" which was previously a "Watch and Act")
Alright – so someone must have made a mistake – mistakes happen, we are only human after all.
But………. Something seems to be going on – here is the map for area concerned. Noting 3 marks,
1. The red letter ‘A’ – this indicates the approx location of the fire as per the advice, which states Doncaster East.
2. The circle at the top of the page shows Warrandyte.
3. The circle at the bottom shows Doncaster East.
Just to clarify what you are seeing – is that the same fire appears to have two locations if you use the suburb. So let’s look a little closer - The fire was located on Target Road. Let’s see where that is, using the information provide by the Advice – which is Beasley’s Nursery.
A search reveals:-
Target Road is located in Warrandyte NOT Doncaster East refer below for confirmation of this
So let’s look at other factors. How would this ‘human error’ possibly occur – It has to be human error – It can’t be anything else can it?
The advice clearly states that areas of Doncaster East and Templestowe are likely to be affected. Where does Warrandyte come into this?
The only conclusion I can come to is that the site I am looking at is CFA operated and Warrandyte is a CFA area – whereas Doncaster is MFB operated and since the fire was possibly going to impact Doncaster, that is why Doncaster was listed.
ONCE AGAIN CONFUSION REIGNS SUPREME
The Alert/Advice should have looked like this:-
Warrandyte – Targets Road (Doncaster East/Templestowe)
That way it ties in with the CFA incident reporting AND the correct location AND also the area possibly being impacted.
According to the interim report This warning FAILED to comply with 4.2 of the interim report, The advice, which is what will be broadcast in the general media - failed to recognise that areas of Warrandyte MAY also be affected by these fires - It is NOT possible for areas between the two suburbs NOT to be impacted.
The State ensure that the content of bushfire warnings issued in Victoria reflects the principles set out in the Commonwealth policy paper Emergency Warnings — Choosing Your Words (2008).
In particular, all bushfire warnings issued in Victoria must use clear language, avoid euphemisms, and contain explicit information in relation to:
■■ the severity, location, predicted direction and likely time of impact of bushfires on specific communities and locations; and
■■ the predicted severity of impact of the bushfire and whether a specific fire poses a threat to human life
I would very much appreciate your thoughts and ideas as to how you would fix the problem.