International Symposium on Mitigative Measures against Snow ...

<strong>International</strong> <strong>Symposium</strong> on Mitigative Measures against Snow Avalanches
Egilsstaðir, Iceland, March 11–14, 2008
takes a long time to gain experience as a snow observer and to become familiar with
avalanche conditions in a certain area, both geographical conditions as well as meteorological.
The point has been raised among snow observers that monitoring may be reduced with the buildup
of avalanche defences although the national authorities have made assurances to the contrary.
In fact there has been an added emphasis on monitoring and research in the past years and that
policy should continue in the future. There are still some towns without avalanche protection, and
it should be noted that dams and/or supporting structures are mainly constructed to defend densely
populated, residential districts. The monitoring of avalanche danger also needs, however, to be
considered for industrial and commercial buildings, roads, skiing areas, rural districts.
9. DIVISION OF COST BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE LOCAL
MUNICIPALITIES
As previously mentioned, the construction cost of avalanche defences is divided between the
state (90%) and the relevant municipality (10%). The municipality may receive a loan from the
Avalanche and Landslide Fund corresponding to their 10% share of the cost and then reimburse
the loan in 15 years according to predetermined rules. This division of cost between the state
and municipality makes it possible financially for the local authorities to undertake these
projects. It is, however, clear that these are added expenses for the communities in Iceland
facing avalanche hazard and in the interest of equality, avalanche defences should be solely the
financial responsibility of the state. It should be noted that the maintenance cost for the defences
is divided 60-40 between the state and relevant municipality. This cost can become considerable
as time passes necessitating talks between the state and municipalities on these issues.
10. EFFECT OF AVALANCHE DANGER ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
ENDANGERED COMMUNITITES
It is clear that media coverage regarding avalanche danger has a negative impact on the
respective communities. Notices on evacuations carried out and announcements declaring an
end to the state of emergency due to avalanche danger are extremely negative for the
communities in question. Although there is limited research into the effects that avalanche
danger may have on regional development, it is not unlikely that the long-term effects on the
development of the settlements in question are quite negative. An overview of population
development in communities in Iceland facing avalanche danger that has recently been made
does, however, not show a clear distinction between these communities and other communities
of a similar size in the same parts of the country.
11. CONCLUSIONS
The response of the state government and local municipalities to the avalanche accidents in the
Westfjords in 1995 has been very different from the response to the accident in Neskaupstaður
in 1974. The laws and regulations regarding hazard zoning and protection measures have been
completely rewritten since 1995 and an expensive programme of a large-scale build-up of protection
measures is ongoing based on an allocated source of governmental funding. Although
the build-up of protection measures since 1995 has been slower than initially planned and many
problems have been encountered, the state and local authorities are committed by law to complete
the build-up of protection measures within a “reasonable” time. This stands in sharp contrast
to the response to the accident in 1974, which led to some revision of hazard zoning, but
very little action to improve the safety of the endangered villages.
Bjarnason 207