Here we go again

Fire-related topics

Here we go again

Postby dieseluphammerdown » Jul 16th, 2015, 3:41 pm


Butt flickers beware. Your careless actions could lead to a fine and possibly a whole lot more.

So far this year, fire crews have responded to more than 1,000 wildfires in the province (almost double the same time last year). One-third of them were human caused.

According to figures released by the provincial government, that's 375 fires, leading to an estimated 43,718 hectares up in flames.

Vernon RCMP spokesman Gord Molendyk said, currently, anyone who throws butts out the window of their car could face a fine of $81 for littering, or $173 fine for violating the Wildfire Act.

However, bringing a butt flicker to justice requires a willingness on the part of the witness to go to court and testify.

Molendyk said if it is proven the discarded cigarette caused a wildfire, the offender could be on the hook for the costs of fighting that fire.

But penalties could soon get even tougher.

“We must send a clear message to those that carelessly start wildfires their behaviour will not be tolerated,” said Mike Morris, parliamentary secretary to Minister of Forests Steve Thomson. “That's why the minister ... has asked me to take a look across government at the current structure of fines and penalties for people who cause wildfires, and consider new ways to crack down on those careless acts.”

Among the areas being looked are a possible doubling of fines for failing to extinguish a campfire, banning those who break campfire bans from provincial parks, and impounding the vehicles of butt flickers.

“These are serious actions, but I think we need to at least consider them to send the message that enough is enough,” Morris said.

“As a former law enforcement officer, I'm fully aware of the challenges to enforce these laws and the need to raise awareness to end these destructive acts. It's often said that you can't legislate against stupidity. But, if exploring the idea of harsher penalties for careless acts means more people get the message, we must do it.

“Naturally occurring fires from sources like lightning are difficult enough for our dedicated firefighters to handle. If we're going to continue to ask them to put their lives on the line to keep people and property safe, we need to do everything we can to end behaviours that lead to needless wildfires,” said Morris.
I agree with everything in here except for the part I highlighted .
I have no problem with butt flickers getting their vehicle impounded , what I have a problem with is that people who carelessly start wild fires by their actions with a camp fires don't face the same penalty.
Why not impound their vehicles and campers or trailers as well?! Shouldn't a reckless act whether it a flicked butt or a reckless act with a camp fire carry the same penalty ? After all both reckless actions can result in the same end result and if reducing human caused wildfires is the goal then shouldn't all penalties for the same actions carry the same penalty.
This message brought to you by a proud old stock Canadian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Id love to spit some beechnut in that dudes eyes
And shoot him with my old 45

5 people like this post.
User avatar
dieseluphammerdown
Guru
 
Posts: 5255
Likes: 5182 posts
Liked in: 3116 posts
Joined: Apr 23rd, 2009, 8:31 am

Re: Here we go again

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Jul 16th, 2015, 3:53 pm


Butt flickers beware. Your careless actions could lead to a fine and possibly a whole lot more.

So far this year, fire crews have responded to more than 1,000 wildfires in the province (almost double the same time last year). One-third of them were human caused.

According to figures released by the provincial government, that's 375 fires, leading to an estimated 43,718 hectares up in flames.

Vernon RCMP spokesman Gord Molendyk said, currently, anyone who throws butts out the window of their car could face a fine of $81 for littering, or $173 fine for violating the Wildfire Act.

However, bringing a butt flicker to justice requires a willingness on the part of the witness to go to court and testify.

Molendyk said if it is proven the discarded cigarette caused a wildfire, the offender could be on the hook for the costs of fighting that fire.

But penalties could soon get even tougher.

“We must send a clear message to those that carelessly start wildfires their behaviour will not be tolerated,” said Mike Morris, parliamentary secretary to Minister of Forests Steve Thomson. “That's why the minister ... has asked me to take a look across government at the current structure of fines and penalties for people who cause wildfires, and consider new ways to crack down on those careless acts.”

Among the areas being looked are a possible doubling of fines for failing to extinguish a campfire, banning those who break campfire bans from provincial parks, and impounding the vehicles of butt flickers.

“These are serious actions, but I think we need to at least consider them to send the message that enough is enough,” Morris said.

“As a former law enforcement officer, I'm fully aware of the challenges to enforce these laws and the need to raise awareness to end these destructive acts. It's often said that you can't legislate against stupidity. But, if exploring the idea of harsher penalties for careless acts means more people get the message, we must do it.

“Naturally occurring fires from sources like lightning are difficult enough for our dedicated firefighters to handle. If we're going to continue to ask them to put their lives on the line to keep people and property safe, we need to do everything we can to end behaviours that lead to needless wildfires,” said Morris.



dieseluphammerdown wrote:I agree with everything in here except for the part I highlighted .
I have no problem with butt flickers getting their vehicle impounded , what I have a problem with is that people who carelessly start wild fires by their actions with a camp fires don't face the same penalty.
Why not impound their vehicles and campers or trailers as well?! Shouldn't a reckless act whether it a flicked butt or a reckless act with a camp fire carry the same penalty ? After all both reckless actions can result in the same end result and if reducing human caused wildfires is the goal then shouldn't all penalties for the same actions carry the same penalty.


Not choosing sides here, but perhaps it's because campfire caused forest fires are more often accidental than deliberate, whereas tossing butts out a moving vehicle is most assuredly deliberate, and the act of doing so creates a higher probability of a fire being started as the butt gets fanned by the wind created by the vehicles speed.

I'm not saying I'm correct, and am just speculating, but it makes sense to me that the butt tossers are the greater hazard, and display a higher level of disregard for the outcome of their actions, actions in which the automobile is a participant.
"Death is life's way of saying you're fired!"
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 12496
Likes: 1120 posts
Liked in: 2658 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby tgm929 » Jul 16th, 2015, 3:54 pm

What we really need are fines for starting numerous threads on the same topic.

4 people like this post.
tgm929
Board Meister
 
Posts: 463
Likes: 22 posts
Liked in: 117 posts
Joined: Jun 4th, 2012, 10:42 am

Re: Here we go again

Postby dieseluphammerdown » Jul 16th, 2015, 4:09 pm

LoneWolf_53 wrote:
Not choosing sides here, but perhaps it's because campfire caused forest fires are more often accidental than deliberate, whereas tossing butts out a moving vehicle is most assuredly deliberate, and the act of doing so creates a higher probability of a fire being started as the butt gets fanned by the wind created by the vehicles speed.

I'm not saying I'm correct, and am just speculating, but it makes sense to me that the butt tossers are the greater hazard, and display a higher level of disregard for the outcome of their actions, actions in which the automobile is a participant.
The part I highlighted talks about not properly extinguishing camp fires and having camp fires during bans.
To me those are as careless as flicking butts out the window and should carry the same consequences.
This message brought to you by a proud old stock Canadian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Id love to spit some beechnut in that dudes eyes
And shoot him with my old 45

2 people like this post.
User avatar
dieseluphammerdown
Guru
 
Posts: 5255
Likes: 5182 posts
Liked in: 3116 posts
Joined: Apr 23rd, 2009, 8:31 am

Re: Here we go again

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Jul 16th, 2015, 5:19 pm

LoneWolf_53 wrote:
Not choosing sides here, but perhaps it's because campfire caused forest fires are more often accidental than deliberate, whereas tossing butts out a moving vehicle is most assuredly deliberate, and the act of doing so creates a higher probability of a fire being started as the butt gets fanned by the wind created by the vehicles speed.

I'm not saying I'm correct, and am just speculating, but it makes sense to me that the butt tossers are the greater hazard, and display a higher level of disregard for the outcome of their actions, actions in which the automobile is a participant.



dieseluphammerdown wrote:The part I highlighted talks about not properly extinguishing camp fires and having camp fires during bans.
To me those are as careless as flicking butts out the window and should carry the same consequences.


I'm with you on the "having camp fires during bans" as I'm sure the ones who do that are more often than not fully aware of conditions and current regulations, given how much media attention the dryness has garnered.

I don't quite feel the same way about properly extinguishing a fire though, as I think many have good intentions, but just aren't quite diligent enough. I know I've had legal fires with a permit on the property and noted that sometimes though I've poured water on it with a hose for some time, and even stirred the ashes, sometimes the fire travels underground and causes problems, so I guess what I'm saying is, putting some fires out may not be as easy as it sounds.

Even fire fighters miss hot spots if they don't have one of those heat sensor tools in their possession.

Again not saying I'm 100% correct, but that's just my thoughts on it, and as such, I'm more inclined to cut a person some slack if it's an improperly extinguished camp fire as opposed to flat out not bothering to extinguish it, or tossing a butt out of a vehicle.
"Death is life's way of saying you're fired!"
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 12496
Likes: 1120 posts
Liked in: 2658 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby Xia33 » Jul 16th, 2015, 7:19 pm

So....let me get this straight.....campers, partiers, hikers etc....or those that are sitting around a campfire in the middle of a beautiful forest...well aware of their surroundings...or not....don't deserve the same punishment as a "brain dead but flicker", no matter which of them starts a "wildfire?? Hmmmmmm. Something is wrong with this picture. Everyone and their dog will be watching for butt flickers....who is going to watch the campers, partiers, hikers, etc?....oops,,,,sorry....they really aren't to blame if their fire causes destruction of that beautiful forest, and the wildlife that resides there, or the homes close because they may not understand how to make sure a fire is out. Seriously?? Considering that those campfires, etc., make up approximately the same and/or more of human caused fires the punishment should be on the same level. Jeez...no blatant bias on here! Imo, there is no difference in brain activity between them. Protect the environment, no matter which type of brain dead you are,

2 people like this post.
Xia33
Übergod
 
Posts: 1105
Likes: 1816 posts
Liked in: 567 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2013, 8:57 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby MAPearce » Jul 16th, 2015, 8:07 pm

I'm good... I don't flick butts out the window...

I smoke , butt I don't in the car .I'm not allowed to smoke in the car.

It wrecks the resale value.
I payed attention in High school....But not to what they were trying to teach me..

mexi cali likes this post.
User avatar
MAPearce
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 12969
Likes: 2785 posts
Liked in: 5698 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2009, 6:15 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby mexi cali » Jul 16th, 2015, 8:26 pm

I like how you spelled "butt" instead of "but".

Ok, I'm leaving. No need to get snarky.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition
User avatar
mexi cali
Guru
 
Posts: 7205
Likes: 4155 posts
Liked in: 5872 posts
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 2:48 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby mexi cali » Jul 16th, 2015, 8:27 pm

It wrecks the resale value of your lungs, too.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition
User avatar
mexi cali
Guru
 
Posts: 7205
Likes: 4155 posts
Liked in: 5872 posts
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 2:48 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Jul 16th, 2015, 9:56 pm

Xia33 wrote:So....let me get this straight.....campers, partiers, hikers etc....or those that are sitting around a campfire in the middle of a beautiful forest...well aware of their surroundings...or not....don't deserve the same punishment as a "brain dead but flicker", no matter which of them starts a "wildfire?? Hmmmmmm. Something is wrong with this picture. Everyone and their dog will be watching for butt flickers....who is going to watch the campers, partiers, hikers, etc?....oops,,,,sorry....they really aren't to blame if their fire causes destruction of that beautiful forest, and the wildlife that resides there, or the homes close because they may not understand how to make sure a fire is out. Seriously?? Considering that those campfires, etc., make up approximately the same and/or more of human caused fires the punishment should be on the same level. Jeez...no blatant bias on here! Imo, there is no difference in brain activity between them. Protect the environment, no matter which type of brain dead you are,


Struggling with grasping the difference between a deliberate act of carelessness, and an accidental one are you?

I mean I did clearly state, that those who blatantly leave a campfire without making the effort to extinguish it are in the same category as butt flickers.

There is however a huge difference between blatant wilful disregard for regulations as evidenced by ones actions, and an actual accidental oversight hence the punishment shouldn't be the same severity across the board.

Investigators are quite capable of distinguishing between a campfire carelessly put out, and one where no effort was made to put it out. As in all else the punishment should fit the crime.
"Death is life's way of saying you're fired!"
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 12496
Likes: 1120 posts
Liked in: 2658 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby ifwisheswerehorses » Jul 17th, 2015, 1:12 am

How is leaving a still smouldering campfire an accidental oversight?
Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you’ll ever regret.

Xia33 likes this post.
User avatar
ifwisheswerehorses
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 980
Likes: 45 posts
Liked in: 497 posts
Joined: Jul 14th, 2010, 1:58 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby Woodenhead » Jul 17th, 2015, 2:09 am

They just don't want to fine the campers tourists too much and scare them away.
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
 
Posts: 5187
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 968 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Here we go again

Postby Xia33 » Jul 17th, 2015, 6:49 am


Struggling with grasping the difference between a deliberate act of carelessness, and an accidental one are you?
not at all....careless is careless...imo

I mean I did clearly state, that those who blatantly leave a campfire without making the effort to extinguish it are in the same category as butt flickers.
as are those, imo, who do not make every effort to extinguish a campfire, a backyard fire, etc...am wondering how one would distinguish between a campfire "blatantly" left and one "carelessly" put out? Fine line there. Stupidity is stupidity

There is however a huge difference between blatant wilful disregard for regulations as evidenced by ones actions, and an actual accidental oversight hence the punishment shouldn't be the same severity across the board.
is it not a regulation to extinguish any and all fires? Or not have one at all? All humans with half a brain, be they "butt flickers", partiers or campers are well aware of the conditions....so, imo, it is blatant disregard not only for regulations but for the beauty surrounding them

Investigators are quite capable of distinguishing between a campfire carelessly put out, and one where no effort was made to put it out. As in all else the punishment should fit the crime.
but then it is much easier for everyone to carry dash cams to identify a "butt flicker" than it is to find the careless campers, hikers partiers, etc.....yes punishment should fit the crime...and here it is starting a wildfire. Splitting hairs on how is ridiculous imo

2 people like this post.
Xia33
Übergod
 
Posts: 1105
Likes: 1816 posts
Liked in: 567 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2013, 8:57 pm


Return to Fire Watch 2015

Who is online

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