[NHK] It has been 30 years since the pyroclastic flow of Mt. Unzen Fugen, which killed 43 people. Why did the damage occur? What I have come to see is the issues that are still being posed ...

“Did you approach because you knew it was dangerous?” Unzen Fugendake Lessons learned 30 years ago June 10, 17:29

It's

been said many times for about 10 years since I became a reporter,

I give due

consideration to safety when interviewing in dangerous places

In the disaster of Mt. Fugen in Unzen 30 years ago, interviewers approached a dangerous site.

And many locals were involved.

If the interviewer did not approach, there would have been no damage so far.

However, I was still wondering when I was interviewing at the disaster site.

"... Did you come closer to knowing that it was a dangerous place that could kill you?"

I want to know more about that time.

I started interviewing.

What I was able to see was the issue that is still being posed.

(Maria Kiyoki, Disaster Officer, Social Affairs Department)

Unzen Fugendake pyroclastic flow disaster 30 years ago

On June 3, 1991, a pyroclastic flow at Mt. Fugen in Unzen killed 43 people.

There are 16 members of the press, 12 members of the fire brigade, 6 ordinary people, 4 taxi drivers, 3 volcano researchers, and 2 police officers (Cabinet Office Disaster Prevention Summary).

Fire brigade members and police officers were calling attention to the interviewer, and the taxi driver was involved while accompanying the interviewer.

Many people died at the so-called "fixed point", which is about 4 kilometers from the summit.

Interviewers were in the process of shooting a realistic image of the eruption at this point overlooking the entire mountain.

At that time, there was an "evacuation advisory" at this place.

-"Did they not recognize the danger?"

First, I decided to investigate the volcanic activity at that time.

Danger of pyroclastic flow not transmitted

I picked up a book.

It is "Unzen Fugendake eruption memoir".

In addition to the situation of the volcano at that time, the movements of local governments, residents, and interviewers are clearly described there.

The memoir was written by Kazuya Ota (86), who was the director of the Shimabara Earthquake and Volcano Observatory at Kyushu University at that time.

He is an expert who was called a "home doctor" who knows Mt. Fugen in Unzen.

Examining records, the eruption began in November 1990, the year before, and has been active since then.

And on May 24, about 10 days before the disaster, the first pyroclastic flow was confirmed.

This pyroclastic flow was caused by the collapse of a lava dome that had accumulated near the summit, and was considered to be "small" by volcanological evaluation.

According to the memoir, the tip of the pyroclastic flow reached in the mountains on the 24th.

He was banned from entering the mountainous areas, so he didn't reiterate the danger.

We asked Mr. Ota about the detailed situation at that time.

Mr. Ota

"When I confirmed the pyroclastic flow that occurred on the 24th, I honestly thought that it was not a big deal, so I personally thought that it was better not to make a lot of noise. There was concern about damage to rumors. Since the eruption began, locals have voiced that the hot spring town has been misunderstood as if it were dangerous. When the pyroclastic flow was added, tourists said. I was afraid that more protests would come. As a local researcher, I was worried about that. "

Under these circumstances, the interviewer approached the mountain to capture the pyroclastic flow.

But two days later, a changing event occurs.

May 26th.

The pyroclastic flow unexpectedly flowed down and approached the area where the houses were located.

Mr. Ota advised Shimabara City about the danger of pyroclastic flow.

Shimabara City will issue the first evacuation advisory for pyroclastic flows.

The "fixed point" where the interviewer was located was also included in the area covered by the evacuation advisory.

"The size of the pyroclastic flow is larger than expected. We need to be very vigilant."

Mr. Ota held a press conference with the chairman of the Volcanic Eruption Prediction Liaison Committee and complained.

Although the evacuation of the residents has progressed, many interviewers continued to interview at "fixed points".

It is said that he was there during the night to capture the pyroclastic flow that glows red at night.

There was also a taxi driver arranged by the interviewer, a fire brigade and police officers to call for caution.

Mr. Ota, who knew the situation, appealed to the disaster countermeasures headquarters in Shimabara City.

"The evacuation advisory area is dangerous. Please warn the media and related parties." The

city also requested the interviewers to move out.

But many didn't listen to this.

This is the August issue of Newspaper Research published in the year of the disaster.

Here, the reports of the interviewers were written about the situation at that time.

"In the Unzen interview, the weight of the photographs was heavy. And it seems that each company has never been able to compete with the superiority and inferiority of color photographs." (Newspaper)

"Tokyo is" safety first. There is no powerful image. It doesn't matter, "but on the other hand, the person in charge of each news program talked about the difference from the commercial video on the front line and put tangible and intangible pressure on the message. I didn't want to be

And June 3, 1991.

A pyroclastic flow disaster involving many people has occurred.

Mr. Ota

"I was perceived as having a low risk by first expressing it as" small scale. "I myself, withdrawing the previous statement and repeatedly warning that the risk is higher than expected. I thought I could be safe, but I couldn't. "

A "warning" issued by an expert before a disaster occurred.

Why couldn't the interviewers at that time feel it as a "crisis of life"?

Even if I wanted to take a picture of the scene, if I knew that there was a risk of losing my life and that other people could get involved, wouldn't I have approached it?

I was still wondering when I was interviewing at the disaster site.

I was disturbed by "prejudice"

At that time, I decided to talk to a senior reporter who was interviewing Mt. Fugen in Unzen.

This is Kenichi Takezoe, who is currently the director of NHK Kagoshima Broadcasting Station.

Thirty years ago, I was a reporter for the fifth year at the NHK Nagasaki Broadcasting Station, where I started.

I went to the observatory at the foot of Unzen and continued to interview Mr. Ota.

-"Why didn't you think the pyroclastic flow was dangerous?" When

I asked frankly, he replied:

"Various" preconceptions "disturbed ..."

<Prejudice "No damage from pyroclastic flow since recorded history">

The eruption of Mt. Fugen in Unzen occurred for the first time in about 200 years.

He learned from past disasters what kind of damage is expected.

What was famous was the disaster called "Shimabara Catastrophe Higo" in the Edo period.

The earthquake that occurred during the eruption caused the mountain to collapse and flow into the Ariake Sea, causing a large tsunami.

A large tsunami struck Kumamoto Prefecture on the opposite bank of the Ariake Sea, killing about 15,000 people.

On the other hand, since the dawn of history, there has been no record of damage caused by "pyroclastic flows".

It is said that this led to having a false "prejudice".

Mr. Takezoe

"When conducting disaster coverage, it is basic to keep in mind what kind of damage is expected. At that time, we also keep in mind the disasters that occurred in the past. The pyroclastic flow actually occurs for the first time. Even when I did, even if I knew that it was dangerous, it was difficult to understand the image if it had never happened in the past, and it was difficult to think that it would cause great damage. I intend to learn from past disasters, but on the contrary It has led to prejudice. "

<Prejudice "Debris flow is more dangerous than pyroclastic flow">

May 15th, about half a month before the pyroclastic flow occurred.

A debris flow occurred in a river along the mountain.

Heavy rains often occurred, and local governments repeatedly issued evacuation advisories calling for the danger of debris flow.

At the scene, there was widespread awareness that the biggest danger was debris flow.

Also, the "fixed point" where most of the interviewers were located was far from the river and was on a hill.

Although it was in the area of "evacuation advisory", it is said that there was a belief that the risk of damage was low because debris flows and pyroclastic flows flow down along rivers and low places.

This “prejudice” of many interviewees at the scene expanded the damage.

At the end of the interview, Mr. Takezoe said with tears.

Mr. Takezoe

"After the disaster, the chief of the local police station said,'My important subordinate died to inform you of the danger.' I was keenly aware of it, and I was terribly shocked. I had no choice but to apologize. The natural force that causes disasters greatly exceeds the capabilities of human beings. want"

Why did my husband die in Unzen?

I had another person who really wanted to hear from me.

Mayumi Yanai.

My husband is Makio Yanai, an NHK cameraman who died in a pyroclastic flow during the interview.

I encountered a pyroclastic flow during an interview at the "Agricultural Training Institute", which is about 300 meters below the "fixed point".

The Yanai cameraman also covered the Gulf War.

Mayumi understood the mission of interviewing at dangerous sites at that time.

However, he says he has been thinking about "what it means to tell" for 30 years after her husband died.

Mayumi

"I've always wondered why my husband died in Unzen. I know it's important to convey the disaster scene in a video, but there's nothing I have to tell even if I give my life."

At this site, many people died because of the actions of the interviewers.

Mayumi has been saddened as a bereaved family for many years, and at the same time, has felt guilty.

And now that disasters are occurring frequently, I was worried that the same thing would happen again every time the situation of the disaster area was shown on TV.

Mayumi

"I'm still worried that it's okay to see the press interviewing in the disaster area. I don't know what will happen at the disaster site. There is a sense of crisis that can only be understood at the site. I want you to develop the ability to make decisions. I want to convey that to the people who are interviewing on-site. I think that is the lesson and message that my husband left behind. "

Challenges of "prejudice" Even now

It has been taught many times based on the lesson of Mt. Unzen Fugendake,

"We give due consideration to safety when interviewing in dangerous places

However, what I learned through this interview was the fact that the interviewer did not think that there was a risk of losing his life.

If he doesn't feel any danger, he continues to interview, saying, "I want to be as thin as possible on site."

The biggest reason for this was "prejudice," and I thought it was still a problem.

"Learn from past disasters"

This is important in disaster coverage.

However, being too obsessed with the recorded past leads to "prejudice" that makes us think that nothing else can happen.

In my experience of interviewing, such as the Great East Japan Earthquake, the eruption of Mt. Ontake, and the recent heavy rain disaster, disasters have always exceeded my imagination.

disaster coverage that

"focuses on the most dangerous risks,"

it is important to investigate and convey the greatest risks.

However, because we emphasize one risk, it can lead to “prejudice” that makes us think that there is less risk in other cases.

And, there is a risk that interviews with this "prejudice" will kill not only the press but also the people around them who have been moved along with it.

The same thing should never be repeated.

There is no absolute safety

Disasters are still occurring frequently in Japan.

I also went to many disaster areas for coverage.

"What happened?" "What is needed in the disaster area?" "What are the challenges?"

Unless you look at the site and listen to the people there, you will not be able to see the true situation. Because sometimes.

However, at that time, we are dealing with the terrifying thing called "nature".

Don't forget that there is "absolute safety".

I think this is a heavy lesson that Unzen Fugendake 30 years ago continues to ask us now.

Social section reporter

Seiki Maria

2010. He joined

starting salary land is Naganohosokyoku

hits the Ontakesan eruption interview

interviews such as disaster prevention and disaster recovery is now in the social part disaster in charge

“Did you approach because you knew it was dangerous?” Lessons learned 30 years ago from Mt. Fugen, Unzen