Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) arrangements were tested during the prolonged wildfire response due to sustained exposure to heat, smoke and physically demanding conditions. Structural firefighting PPE provided appropriate protection; however, it is primarily designed for use within compartment fires and structural firefighting environments, where high thermal protection properties are required to protect firefighters from intense heat exposure. As a result, the design and thermal properties of structural PPE can make it less suited to prolonged wildfire operations, where higher ambient temperatures, difficult terrain and extended periods of physical activity place additional physiological strain on personnel and reduce opportunities for cooling and recovery.

In response to these conditions, some crews adapted their PPE use, including removing fire tunics to improve comfort and endurance during prolonged operations. While this reflected a sensible and pragmatic attempt to manage fatigue and heat stress, it increased potential exposure to heat, smoke, debris and ultraviolet radiation. Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE) was also used where required to provide protection from smoke and harmful particles; however, prolonged use during physically demanding activity across difficult terrain proved challenging for some staff. This was particularly evident where only full face mask RPE was available, which provides a higher level of protection than is often necessary in wildfire conditions but can be more cumbersome and uncomfortable to wear for extended periods. When worn, face masks also affected voice clarity and radio communications; however, crews adapted effectively, adjusting working practices to maintain safety and clear communication within a dynamic operational environment.

These arrangements were subject to ongoing dynamic risk assessment and supervisory oversight, with decisions informed by prevailing fire behaviour, environmental conditions, smoke levels, tactical activity and proximity to risk. Control measures included maintaining safe systems of work, restricting activities to lower risk tasks where appropriate, continual monitoring by supervisors, regular crew rotations, welfare and hydration arrangements, flexible deployment of crews, and the ability to reintroduce full PPE immediately should conditions deteriorate or operational risk increase.

Lightweight, breathable wildfire specific PPE is designed to balance protection with wearability during high temperature, long duration incidents and would better support crew safety, comfort and effectiveness. Similarly, ensuring all staff have a suitable range of RPE options which will reduce fatigue.

A number of fire and rescue services have already introduced wildfire specific PPE as part of their operational capability. This incident provides a clear example of where such investment would enhance resilience and better align equipment provision with the evolving risk profile associated with large scale wildfire events.

 What Worked Well
• Structural firefighting PPE provided a good level of protection in high-risk
conditions
• Crews demonstrated adaptability in managing prolonged exposure and
physically demanding conditions
• High levels of professionalism maintained despite challenging environmental
factors
• Awareness of physiological demands supported practical decision-making
on the incident ground.

Learning Opportunities
• Review PPE provision to ensure suitability for prolonged wildfire conditions
• Ensure all staff have flexible options of RPE and are appropriately face
fitted.