The incident presented a broad and sustained range of health, safety and welfare challenges, associated with prolonged wildfire operations in a demanding and remote environment. While many of these challenges aligned with the recognised risk profile of large scale wildfire incidents, they were significantly amplified by the duration of operations, geographic complexity, extreme weather conditions, and the presence of additional high consequence hazards, including unprecedented fire behaviour and unexploded ordnance (UXO).

Key risks included prolonged exposure to heat, smoke and airborne contaminants; fatigue arising from extended duty periods and long travel distances; and hazards associated with vehicle and plant movements across difficult terrain, narrow access routes and reduced visibility. These risks were systematically identified and actively managed through a combination of dynamic and analytical risk assessment, exercised in line with the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. Decision making throughout the incident was informed by National Operational Guidance (NOG)17, relevant Service Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and specialist advice where required.

Effective command, control, coordination and supervision were maintained throughout, with officers providing tactical direction, oversight and continual review as conditions evolved. Control measures were introduced progressively, including adaptations to tactics, access arrangements and deployment models, ensuring that foreseeable risks were reduced so far as reasonably practicable, while maintaining operational effectiveness.

This was evidenced through documented command decision logs, analytical risk assessments, tactical briefings, Fire Control records, ResilienceDirect updates and multiagency TCG/SCG records, alongside continual review and adaptation of tactics, resource deployment and control measures as the incident evolved.

The risk posed by unexploded ordnance (UXO) became apparent following the first explosion heard on the incident ground and was subsequently managed through ongoing risk assessment, specialist advice from Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) partners, and the application of proportionate control measures. Firefighting tactics, access routes and equipment use were adapted, with defined exclusion zones enforced and all operations restricted to established tracks, enabling safe operations within a complex and hazardous environment. Earlier access to detailed UXO information through pre-planning would have further strengthened safety arrangements and should be explored as part of the lessons learned.

Variable wind conditions resulted in rapidly changing smoke behaviour across the incident ground, affecting visibility and exposure levels. This created ongoing challenges in the siting of key assets, including the Incident Command Unit and welfare facilities. Decontamination and contaminant management were also significant considerations. Due to the remote setting, limited water availability and logistical constraints, full decontamination and immediate access to shower facilities were not always achievable in the early stages and required adaptive and pragmatic arrangements. As the incident matured, the Strategic Holding Area (SHA) provided better options.