Declare fireban when risk is high

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby bjguen » Jul 28th, 2017, 1:12 pm

dle wrote:
tsayta wrote:True but I thought there was a story on here yesterday where in fact did charge the fine for an Albertan that had a fire


that's right tsayta - it is reported that they did fine that ONE Alberta guy, but if they are seeing people with fires on a more or less daily basis, are the fining them all? Are they just putting the run on them and putting out the fire?

I want to see it reported when it happens and when the people are fined - I think that will spread the word that we mean business and are serious about protecting our forests and homes and it's not just lip-service about the fine.


Here you go:

https://www.castanet.net/news/Vernon/202954/Big-fines-for-campfire

dle likes this post.
bjguen
 
Posts: 18
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 8 posts
Joined: Jan 23rd, 2007, 4:59 am

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby tsayta » Jul 29th, 2017, 8:47 am

I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
User avatar
tsayta
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2940
Likes: 1201 posts
Liked in: 1529 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Queen K » Jul 29th, 2017, 1:33 pm

Are you freaking kidding us? Accessed Tweedsmuir while closed, got stranded, started a campfire?

Is there a Moron of the Year Award they were competing for? :cuss:
I'm over 50, I'm full of rage lately, I have two axes and I have a huge tree stump that needs to come out. Any questions?

tsayta likes this post.
User avatar
Queen K
Queen of the Castle
 
Posts: 52583
Likes: 11902 posts
Liked in: 12450 posts
Joined: Jan 31st, 2007, 12:39 pm
Location: What? You mean here?

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby mexi cali » Jul 30th, 2017, 9:36 am

Glad they found them and fined them but the fine wasn't enough. The three morons in Vernon were fined 1200 each for their little fire. These guys were in a restricted zone on top of the fire and they only got hit with 1200 total.

Shudda been 2400.00 minimum.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition

tsayta likes this post.
User avatar
mexi cali
Guru
 
Posts: 5419
Likes: 2270 posts
Liked in: 3421 posts
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 2:48 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby sulchie » Jul 31st, 2017, 9:30 am

Why haven't locked gates been installed at every entrance to the backcountry? There is a certain percentage of the population who cannot be trusted there at all. So they will ruin it for everyone else.
sulchie
Fledgling
 
Posts: 135
Likes: 19 posts
Liked in: 51 posts
Joined: Nov 28th, 2012, 8:41 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby tsayta » Jul 31st, 2017, 9:33 am

sulchie wrote:Why haven't locked gates been installed at every entrance to the backcountry? There is a certain percentage of the population who cannot be trusted there at all. So they will ruin it for everyone else.

Gates will work about as well as my no trespassing sign I set out for the deer
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW

Glacier likes this post.
User avatar
tsayta
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2940
Likes: 1201 posts
Liked in: 1529 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Fancy » Jul 31st, 2017, 9:36 am

sulchie wrote:Why haven't locked gates been installed at every entrance to the backcountry? There is a certain percentage of the population who cannot be trusted there at all. So they will ruin it for everyone else.
Not possible.
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
User avatar
Fancy
Grand Pilgrim
 
Posts: 45358
Likes: 1122 posts
Liked in: 5894 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby mexi cali » Jul 31st, 2017, 10:24 am

There are many ways around locked gates. Especially in the outdoors.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition
User avatar
mexi cali
Guru
 
Posts: 5419
Likes: 2270 posts
Liked in: 3421 posts
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 2:48 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Glacier » Jul 31st, 2017, 5:24 pm

Tweedsmuir Park is @#[email protected] YUGE! Good luck trying to fence the largest park in BC! 1000s of km of fence over top of rugged mountain tops and moving glaciers. The highway goes right through the middle of the park. Good luck trying to fence that highway!

Queen K likes this post.
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 27214
Likes: 3046 posts
Liked in: 9342 posts
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Silverstarqueen » Jul 31st, 2017, 6:38 pm

You can't fence and gate every field and park that might catch fire, and even if you could it wouldn't stop someone from throwing a lit whatever over the fence. Gates and fences would make it more difficult for fire fighters to enter.And it would prevent the 99% of the public who would be eyes and ears in the parks. If people want to light fires, or don't care enough to put out their lit cigarette, they are going to do it, just to prove they can. Because they are just that smart.
Silverstarqueen
Guru
 
Posts: 7574
Likes: 732 posts
Liked in: 1926 posts
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2012, 8:02 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby dle » Aug 7th, 2017, 7:19 am

Woodenhead wrote:Just don't ban camp fires for firefighters.

Image

Point is that responsible people can be responsible, and nothing is idiot proof.


did anyone ever hear what happened to these guys, if anything? Be interesting to know what the consequence to them was....
dle
Übergod
 
Posts: 1030
Likes: 628 posts
Liked in: 1083 posts
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 1:29 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Catsumi » Aug 7th, 2017, 9:12 am

It's nice to see that the off-road vehicle ban finally implemented a couple of days ago is actually working. Headlines ecstatic; only six new fires this weekend. Yippee!

This thread was started pleading for earlier bans, rather than later when the damage is horrendous.

The grannies near Falkland have really won my heart. They were also repeatedly asking for back country closures from the Fire Office, got nowhere until cbc Daybreak interviewed Pat Peebles. The grassoline and treed area near their homes and ranches is a targeted area for party-folk with irresponsible and nitwit behaviours... campfires, cigs tossed, broken glass, shot deer, garbage, atv's jackassing around, shooting, and whatever else they call "fun". These people have drivers licenses so it follows they are adults.

Peebles and pals decided to "man" their own closure, trading off shifts even through the night to protect the area from the nitwits. Not bad for a bunch of little old ladies! Granny Power Rocks!

It was, I believe, the strong public outcry after hearing this anguished interview that possibly suddenly galvanized the powers that be to declare the off road ban.

We can make a difference.
nothing wrong with being open minded as long as your brains don't fall out.

2 people like this post.
User avatar
Catsumi
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2061
Likes: 2661 posts
Liked in: 1834 posts
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 8:26 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby tsayta » Aug 7th, 2017, 9:16 am

During that cbc interview, they spoke to a bc wildfire representative. His answer was weak. He said they would not close the backcountry because they often get tips from users that there is a fire. Imagine one JACKWAGON starting a fire and then reporting it
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW

Catsumi likes this post.
User avatar
tsayta
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2940
Likes: 1201 posts
Liked in: 1529 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby Catsumi » Aug 7th, 2017, 11:00 am

tsayta wrote:During that cbc interview, they spoke to a bc wildfire representative. His answer was weak. He said they would not close the backcountry because they often get tips from users that there is a fire. Imagine one JACKWAGON starting a fire and then reporting it



Yes, that would be right up there for :cuss: idiot of year award presently held by the Wm Lk fireworks twit. But wonders never cease. :200:

Yes again. The rep for wildfires had astonishing answers...could hardly believe my ears when his excuse for not closing the area was that there were no fire burning there YET. :-X :-X

It just makes me wanna cry.
nothing wrong with being open minded as long as your brains don't fall out.
User avatar
Catsumi
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2061
Likes: 2661 posts
Liked in: 1834 posts
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 8:26 pm

Re: Declare fireban when risk is high

Postby johnny24 » Aug 7th, 2017, 11:37 am

Catsumi wrote:
This thread was started pleading for earlier bans, rather than later when the damage is horrendous.


Majority of the damage was done after the bans were in place. Bans in May and June aren't going to stop fires caused in July.

Catsumi wrote:The grannies near Falkland have really won my heart. They were also repeatedly asking for back country closures from the Fire Office, got nowhere until cbc Daybreak interviewed Pat Peebles. The grassoline and treed area near their homes and ranches is a targeted area for party-folk with irresponsible and nitwit behaviours... campfires, cigs tossed, broken glass, shot deer, garbage, atv's jackassing around, shooting, and whatever else they call "fun". These people have drivers licenses so it follows they are adults.

Peebles and pals decided to "man" their own closure, trading off shifts even through the night to protect the area from the nitwits. Not bad for a bunch of little old ladies! Granny Power Rocks!


Perhaps if this generation tried to make a difference 40 years ago, we wouldn't be talking about his now.
johnny24
Board Meister
 
Posts: 399
Likes: 89 posts
Liked in: 246 posts
Joined: Jan 25th, 2011, 9:16 am

PreviousNext

Return to Fire Watch 2017

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests