THE PRESS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1981. The big earthquake

Press, 3 February 1981, Page 18

THE PRESS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1981. The big earthquake

New Zealand is fortunate that, it has the anniversary of only one calamitous earthquake to commemorate. Thankfulness "must be tempered by the sober anticipation of further disasters which could be as . bad or worse than that which overtook Hawke’s Bay 50 years ago today. Much has been learned and applied in that . half century which would reduce the damage, from an earthquake of the same magnitude in the ; same place today. A more severe earthquake is quite possible and other developments have increased, rather than ‘diminished, the vulnerability of some New Zealand cities to a major shock. <'■

Significant steps are being made in the science of predicting earthquakes, but such predictions are not yet, and perhaps never will be, sufficiently precise to form a basis for planning to deal with a major earthquake. Forecasts would be useful only if they were sufficiently accurate to allow evacuation when, but only when, a major earthquake was highly probable within a short time. > •: " .

In the meantime, the present policy ha’s to be accepted as the correct one—the progressive strengthening of older buildings, the improvement of building practices, and the rapid inclusion of such improvements in

building codes. The great advances in •making buildings proof against earthquake damage since 1931 are a major reason why, although further large earthquakes are inevitable, a major disaster is avoidable. These advances, together with New Zealand’s generally sparse population and the fact that a large proportion of New Zealanders live in detached, timber-framed houses, mean' that New Zealand is -better placed than many other countries which sit on similar, unstable geological foundations to survive a big earthquake.

This does not obviate the need for great attention to civil defence organisation so that the effects of a major earthquake can be greatly reduced. The term “civil defence” may be unfortunate, conjuring up, as it does, images of bandages and cups of tea, and inviting amused scepticism. Such attitudes are foolish. The test is that if civil defence is adequate, fewer people will die in a disaster. Much of the technical information being shared this week at the conference on large earthquakes may be beyond the ken of the general public. It should nevertheless help to drive home the message that New Zealand must be . reatty when the big one comes and that many people are doing some serious work to facilitate such readiness.