FIRE LOSSES.

Otago Witness, Issue 3993, 23 September 1930, Page 7

FIRE LOSSES.

HEAVY TOLL IN NEW ZEALAND.

CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE FOR YEAR £1,230,255.

WELLINGTON, September 17. Fire took a heavy toll of property in New Zealand during 1929. and the lose is conservatively estimated at £1,230,255, according to the annual report of the inspector of fire brigades (Mr T. T. Hugo), which was presented to Parliament today. This waste by fire is equivalent to a loss of 16s 7d per capita of the population. Inspector Hugo said the number of fire calls received throughout the 50 fire districts during the 12 months ended March 31, 1930, totalled 3164, an increase of 118 over the previous 12 months. Of the total number 1351 were property fires, 435 chim _y fires, 573 bush, grass, ana rubbish fires, 717 false alarms and 88 out of district fires. The fire loss throughout the fire districts for the 12 months (all losses quoted unless otherwise stated include loss suffered on both insured and non-insured proper tv) amounted to £410,217. The four heaviest district losses occurred in Wellington (£102,803), Christchurch (£64,912), Auckland (£44,154), and Dunedin (£24,285) Incendiarism or suspected incendiarism is reported as the cause of 58 fires, involving a loss of £51,328, and 46 fii ’os occurred in unoccupied buddings with a loss of £24,084.

Though the fire loss for the vear ended - 31 ’- 1929 > is estimated at £l,-30,255 it is a safe assumption that the actual loss was in excess of that amount. This, with an estimated population m the Dominion of 1,485,594, gives an average loss of 16s 7d per capita. The loss in the 50 fire districts for the corresponding 12 months period amounted £ /.p1’ 999 - . That, with a population of 63/,590 residing within the districts gives a per capita loss of 14s 6d, whilst the loss tor the 848,004 persons resident ln than the fire districts amounted io working out at an average of 18s Id per head as compared with 1928. The returns show a reduction of £405.863 in the fire loss for 1929, and of that amount with the sam? number of outbreaks of fire that occurred in 1928. and including only 43 per cent, of the total population resident therein, £221,116, or 53 per cent, of the reduction, occurred in the first districts. It is well that it is so, in view of the excessive number of outbreaks of fire that annually occur in this country, and also that the fire risk conditions in New Zealand demand an even higher standard of fire-fighting efficiency than in most other civilised countries, due to the greater inflammability of our buildings, the very large majority of which are wholly constructed of a more or less light description of timber. In other countries where any extensive wood or “ frame ” construction obtains the timber used is usually of a heavier description, and generally the buildings, having an internal lining of lath and plaster, or other fire-resisting or slowburning material, are therefore not liable to outbreaks of fire from the most minor causes, as in the case of our buildings, particularly dwelling houses. The decrease in the fire waste of £405.863 as compared with that of the previous year is some satisfaction. The loss, however, of well over £1,250,000 for. 1929 is far too heavy. It is a serious drain upon the resources of a country with a population of under 1,500,000, and seeing that to a very large extent the loss is easily preventable, the conditions certainly call for some organised effort to reduce this annually-recur-ring huge waste of property. The estimated loss for 1929, amounting to £1,230,255, is a conservative estimate, founded on reliable basis, and only relates to loss of property directly destroyed by fire, and does not take into account the manj 7 indirect phases of losses involved, such as dislocation of business, unemployment, increased cost of fire brigade equipment and maintenance, loss of irreplacable public and personal property, etc., and I consider it to be well within the mark, therefore, to set down the fire waste during 1929 at considerably over £1,500,000. As an indication of the abnormality of the waste by fire prevailing in NewZealand a comparison with that in Great Britain is of interest. The fire loss in Great Britain and Ireland during 1929 amounted to £15.617,471 (an increase of £5,000,000 over the loss in 1928). That, with a population of 48,603,553, gives a loss of 6s 5d per capita, or only 39 per cent, of the loss per head in this Dominion. The large increase in the loss over that of the previous year has roused public interest The inspector concluded by stating it would be a step in the right direction if the system of co-ordination between the responsible officers of local governing bodies on the lines of the public utilities committees now operating in some of the Australian cities and in Auckland and Christchurch was adopted in all the large towns in New Zealand. Members of the committees set up include the city or town engineer, building inspector, managers of the electric lighting power and tramway services, the superintendent of the fire brigade, and so on. These committees hold periodical meetings, and discuss suggested alterations and improvements in the various services.

Inspector Hugo makes formal references to his inspection of the Christchurch and tire Dunedin Fire Brigades, and states that the “ turnouts ” in each case were carried out in a smart and efficient manner. Strong criticism, however, is levelled at the Wellington Brigade, the method of drilling the firemen and the directive control at fires both being condemned.