FOCUS
Flood risks
• administrative issues: administrative support for logging information mapping, ICT support, booking of hotels and equipment hire
• incident command: clarity on command structures, functional officer roles, incident closing down process, incident recording, communications and multi agency working arrangements
• incident ground issues: working rotas, driver training for specialist vehicles, radio coverage, working within a multi agency command structure and location of specialist flooding equipment
•
training: 4x4 driving, strategic command and joint agency training, and working with National Resilience assets
• communications: communication strategy required for working with the media
One of the most positive elements to develop during the flooding was a greater engagement with the public. Agencies started working with local pressure groups and individuals to find the solutions to specific local issues. This continued during the debrief and planning cycle, with local communities encouraged to develop their own flood plans, which could, in turn, be integrated into local authority emergency plans. Greater clarity of communication was required
between the services and residents to ensure the views of the community are represented. This could be by supporting community groups to coordinate community messaging and welfare needs, rather than being controlled by public agencies. Local knowledge could also be crucial in coordinating the supply of sandbags and other equipment and resources. DSFRS took the feedback on board and put plans in place to make further improvements to its readiness for dealing with major flood events. A member of the service chaired the Community Resilience in Somerset Project (CRiSP), which is the delivery arm of the 20 year plan. The service supported the EA at public events and was involved in other community events and engagement.
A Response Plan and a Major Site Risk Plan
have also been drawn together by DSFRS, which are linked to the Local Resilience Forum multi agency plans. These have been tested and consulted on internally, as well as with communities and partners.
Improving resilience
Following the flooding, DSFRS held a community safety event in the village of Mulchelney, which had become an island when cut off by floodwater during the extreme rainfall. The service sent
invitations to everyone who lived in the village to a community safety event at Mulchelney Church, and it attended with an education unit, while experienced fire safety officers were on hand to give information and guidance. As a result of the event, the community had
an opportunity to receive a wide range of fire safety information and interaction, and they had a chance to view the service’s resources (including a boat) and understand how the service would respond if the flooding happened again. The village has a very small community comprising only 60 houses and a population of approximately 120 people. Of those, DSFRS engaged with 65% of the population and received 15 home safety referrals. The service continues to carry out a wide
range of work to improve community resilience, using local resources and knowledge to enable people to help themselves during an emergency in a way that complements the local emergency services. Volunteer flood wardens can provide detailed local knowledge and information about the area and the people within it. This involves identifying vulnerable individuals, relaying information to the local community (warning of potential flood areas and where to avoid) and providing information to promote health and wellbeing, which could involve door to door delivery. Flood wardens have a current understanding of the flood risk within their area, which includes the effect on new buildings, roads, farming and land. They also keep an eye out for blocked watercourses, culverts and drains that could restrict water flow during a flood situation. In a flooding incident, a flood warden would identify themselves to the Bronze Commander at an early stage, providing a full picture of the issues present.
18 DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018
www.frmjournal.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
