wood fires

Submitted: Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 21:56
ThreadID: 89997 Views:3807 Replies:13 FollowUps:23
This Thread has been Archived
Witjira Natinal Park has joined the list of parks which prohibit wood fires , which includes fires for cooking , heating and a ban on wood being brought into the National Park from outside.

The ban takes effect from 1st JAN 2012.

The days of sitting by the campfire might be coming to an end!!

Cheers
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Rocker (NSW) - Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 22:33

Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 22:33
Not too sure on what the long term objective of the NPWS is gujimbo - apart from locking everything up, and for what reason I'll never know.

Enjoy the State Forests etc while you can, before these oxygen thief office jockeys, who've probably never been out of the their big smoke ivory towers take them over too.

What they're doing is "wrong"
AnswerID: 469592

Follow Up By: Fatso - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:07

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:07
"oxygen thief office jockeys" love it Rocker
0
FollowupID: 744068

Reply By: Bill BD - Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 22:36

Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 22:36
Pretty clear there are three things they are concerned about: fire, disease, and habitat destruction via wood gathering. The more places are used the bigger these issues become.
AnswerID: 469593

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 23:14

Wednesday, Nov 09, 2011 at 23:14
Yes, all obvious reasons Bill. I enjoy a good campfire as much as anyone but if you can't enjoy the bush without one then it's time to sell the camping gear.
0
FollowupID: 744024

Follow Up By: Member - Oldbaz. NSW. - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:46

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:46
I'm with you blokes,while enjoying a campfire, I rarely light one these days. When one
sees the huge blazes that pose as "campfires", no wonder authorities get jittery.
The damage vandals do hacking down anything that might burn is obvious as well.
Once again it is a minority that causes these reactions, but modern vehicles & tech
has taken these yobbos to even the isolated areas now. Perhaps, in one way, bans
may make it better for those who can camp without fire..........oldbaz.
0
FollowupID: 744047

Follow Up By: Triggy - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 23:38

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 23:38
I am with you Bazooka. If I can't have a camp fire I won't go bush. That's what camping is all about, cooking on an open fire then having a beer around a small, comfortable campfire for the rest of the evenings, We all know how mesmorising a good small campfire can be .. as well as warmth. I don't go camping in the warmer months because of the fire bans, for good reasons obviously , and who wants a campfire after a 30 degree day!
0
FollowupID: 744134

Reply By: caseh - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 07:39

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 07:39
Greetings.
I am all for the banning of fires. I know I am not going to win any popularity contests with this statement but having to HAVE fires is a state of mind.
I am fortunate enough to spend 6 months a year in NZ and the other half in Oz. If you see the number of Grey nomads - and others - on the road, the majority of them lighting fires every night.
The fuel has to come from somewhere and yes, it comes from the bush. Habitat destruction in a big way. We all know campers that even carry chainsaws with them and not just to cut up dead limbs etc. the evidence of desctruction is there for all to see.

I can live happily ever after without campfires and am sure, so can you. After all its all between the ears.

Happy camping and see you back in April.

Cheers, Case
AnswerID: 469603

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:30

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:30
Won't win a popularity contest with me Case.

A failure to make reasonable provisions for peoples aspirations is fundamentaly
behind why half the world don't believe the obvious with global warming.

Hence our response is underwhelming.

Nett effect - alot more burning.

Rather than constant sniping, bans, and general attacks on people appreciacting the bush, we need to engage people positively and they will in turn support making this a better place.
0
FollowupID: 744035

Follow Up By: Member - Ups and Downs - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:20

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:20
Case,

Of course we can 'live' without a fire. or without camping, or even setting foot in the bush, but I believe that the increasing rules are a reason why society seems to be becoming more rebellious.

A question for you though Case - are you one of the Nomads who close the door of your van at 5.00pm and spend the night watching TV? Plenty do that so wouldn't be concerned about a fire.

Paul
0
FollowupID: 744041

Follow Up By: Rob! - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:53

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:53
I'm with Case. A fire is nice but not a neccessity. When we go camping with the kids for a week, we take a bit of wood with us for maybe 2 small fires. the other nights we go without one.
0
FollowupID: 744052

Follow Up By: caseh - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:07

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:07
Hi Paul.
To answer your q. No, we don't watch tv. Not having a sat dish (the old fashioned way of camping remember?) we would not get the reception were we normally go anyway.
I don't go to bed early as statistically most people die in bed. But as I am into birding in a big way i like my habitat to be natural and not plundered by indiscriminate campers. Unfortunately I like the birds in the bush, otherwise I woul;d go to Roebuck Bay and this would solve all my probs . lol.

regards, Case
0
FollowupID: 744067

Follow Up By: Member - Ups and Downs - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 22:08

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 22:08
G'Day Case,

Thanks for your response. Just checking as there are many people who don't do a particular activity, and wan't to force everyone else to be like them.

I still maintain that the more restrictions that are imposed on us leads to previously upright citizens becoming more anti-social in their behaviour.

There does seem to have been a lot of arson the last couple of years.?? Or was it just not reported so much back then.

enjoy your camping.

Paul
0
FollowupID: 744128

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 22:21

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 22:21
Destroying habitat is a load of rubbish!! I have stayed at many a campsite, many of them were National Parks and all i see is a small area around the campsite that is cleared from campers picking up wood. Have a short walk into the bush and see the dense branches and leaves on the ground. Considering that some National Parks are many thousand of acres, its a drop in the bucket. People wont walk more than a hundred metres or so and anything worth burning, is too heavy to lug back to the campsite.. That argument is a non starter in my humble opinion.. Michael
0
FollowupID: 744130

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 18:06

Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 18:06
Ah yes the old drop in the bucket non-argument. Me taking a few logs for firewood won't make any difference. Multiply that by the other thousand visitors every year and the answer is as plain as the nose on your face. The camping area adjacent to the pound in the Flinders Ranges is a classic example and there are many more examples of humans 'loving things to death'. In some areas it may have little effect on habitat (even that's debatable but in any case I'll take the views of experts over itinerants any day) but in many remote areas it does make a big difference if you open your eyes, and mind.

A friend was (partly) clearing his recently purchased block of land recently (mainly large damaged gums likely to fall in high winds). To his horror as one crashed to the ground a family of sugar gliders emerged, relatively unscathed fortunately. He had been careful and vigilant yet didn't know they were there, just as the vast majority of people wouldn't have a clue about the fragility of the habitat or ecosystems they might be upsetting.
0
FollowupID: 744202

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 21:04

Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 21:04
Bazooka! I wasnt suggesting cutting down trees, The less fuel on the ground is a good thing close to a camsite!! Less fuel on the ground saves species like gliders and Koalas and the like in a bush fire.. Probably best you stay at home in case you step on spotted frog or something!! Michael
0
FollowupID: 744217

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 23:25

Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 23:25
Au contraire Michael, I'm happy to venture out because I try to take care. I also have no trouble understanding that it is possible to enjoy the bush and at the same time have as little impact on it as possible (there is always some level of impact obviously). Unlike some though I choose to follow rules and guidleines developed by people who study and manage the bush, diversity and ecosystems (which from what I've read involve just slightly more than koalas and sugar gliders). Takes minimal effort, just a little common sense and sensitivity.

I've spent many happy hours sitting around a campfire and just as many just sitting around an imaginary one. Anyone who hasn't had the pleasure of that experience should really try it. There is a different ambience and it's a good way to make friends with the local fauna.
0
FollowupID: 744243

Reply By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:21

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:21
I think this covered was in an earlier post GUjimbo.

And its so sad, generally this stuff is done by people with good intentions but flawed logic - or more correctly a short term point of view.

The usual outcome is to make things worse overall.

Constantly get amazed at some of the unintended consequences, just yesterday was researching something and came across the mandatory bicycle Helmet laws, seems like a good idea at first, but the practical outcome in Australia was to effectivily cost over 3000 lives.

My approach is to never do nothing, be firm & creative in your response,
its generally easy to make these things revenue negative as far as they affect oneself.

AnswerID: 469608

Follow Up By: Bill BD - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:17

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:17
Bicycle helmets cost lives! Speak to the doctors who used to patch heads up and the OT's who used to teach people to walk again after cracking their skull in a bike fall. I don't know what you read but it is way off the mark. I bet I could find an article somewhere that asserts seatbelt use has cost lives as well..... but it would be rubbish.

I can't for the life of me see how a ban on fires in national and state parks is based on flawed logic. Look around and see the damage. In WA the spread of disease is a huge concern. In popular areas where fires are permitted anything that looks like wood and can get broken up easily gets burned.... even young trees planted deliberately (and the stakes that hold them up). Not to mention the obvious fire risk.
0
FollowupID: 744050

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:42

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:42
Unfortunately Bill, thats the classic reaction - looking at the end effect
and missing how we got there.

The doctor can only comment on the injury - not on that most accidents
are happen with cars and that a Helmeted head occupies twice the area
making a blow more likely, then because the helmet has a large radius
that a lever effect occurs causing an increased rotational force and
hence a lot more neck snapping etc.

But cycle Helmets are not a cause of mine checkout -

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/helmet_statistics.html


Its enough to make you cry, I was surprized that
some places have studied the Australian experience and not gone ahead
with such laws because of the health consequences.

As a side issue, I wonder how many on Exploroz use bicycles for exploring ?
0
FollowupID: 744051

Follow Up By: Rob! - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:14

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:14
What is interesting is that the the anti-helmet voice has only been loud since the introduction of the bicycle hire schemes. I wonder who is funding it?
Why isn't there the same outcry about motorbike helmets?

Anyway, the article mentions that helmets greatly reduce head injuries, have no affect on face injuries and cause a slight increase in the neck injuries.
0
FollowupID: 744053

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:36

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:36
We are getting a bit off Woodfires topic Rob - have created another thread which may be more appropriate.


0
FollowupID: 744054

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 17:07

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 17:07
I can speak with some authority on this having been whacked by a car when I was out training on my road bike - wear a helmet, always!

Forget any unintended consequences, put simply, it saved my life...
0
FollowupID: 744074

Follow Up By: get outmore - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 17:49

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 17:49
as someone that has been saved by more serios injury through wearing a helmet
i respectfully request you dont post such rubish again
0
FollowupID: 744077

Follow Up By: Member - John Baas (WA) - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:57

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:57
Thanks Getoutmore; exactly. And this also risks being a thread hijack!

Cheers.
0
FollowupID: 744124

Reply By: Member - John and Lynne - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:26

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:26
Yes we love a fire when appropriate for camp oven cooking etc. However we have been horrified by the attitudes and practices of many who profess to love the bush! One fairly popular campground, originally grassed and shaded, was reduced to a near desert. Every camper had to light his OWN (unnecessarily ENORMOUS) fire in his OWN place so there were large burnt out fire pits dug all over the place, often only a metre or two from that of a previous camper! These had mostly been just left to die out or not when the campers left the site, and, as we found out, were often still hot beneath the top ashes days later. This practice cost our dog a badly burnt paw and us a vet's bill! Any twig within reach had been hacked off with shade rapidly diminishing! The neighbouring farm property was raided for wood, with damage done to trees and habitat and probably fences.
No doubt that great camp spot will soon be either closed or gated with an admission fee and a supervisor!
Why do all these people carelessly destroy the very attractions they claim to value? Is it possible to educate them? Lynne
AnswerID: 469632

Follow Up By: Member - John and Val - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 16:49

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 16:49
Hi John and Lynne,

Have to agree with you that there are some among us who do seem to leave their brains behind when they go camping, especially when it comes to campfires. For my money a little fire that you can sit up close to is every bit as good as, if not better than a huge bonfire that is too hot to get close to.

We have seen people with chain saws who have very little knowledge of how to use them safely, and no understanding that you can't burn green timber. Nor do they have any understanding of the importance of fallen timber for habitat.

So I suppose its not surprising that fires are banned in many areas.

There is a lot of info tucked away in the forum archives that does come to light with a search. Your unfortunate experience reminded me of a thread I started a few years hereago that brought out a few good points about how to extinguish campfires.

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 744072

Reply By: Grizzle - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 14:27

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 14:27
Please remember these are YOUR National Parks





SO KEEP OUT!!!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 469640

Reply By: Member - Warrie (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 14:48

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 14:48
We were at Manning Gorge last year and every man and his dog had a fire. The smoke rose up 5 metres then spread horizontally throughout the campground. Having dinner in the van ( not watching TV) and the smell overwhelmed us - no fun at all. You couldn't escape it. Put it down to another bush experience LOL....W
Warrie

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 469642

Reply By: Geoff H (Q - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:23

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 15:23
I love a Camp Fire, however National Parks have been set aside to protect the original natural plants and animals in the area.

We still have fires when we camp in a host of other places where the native plants and animals has already been decimated.

AnswerID: 469645

Reply By: Andrew & Jen - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 16:46

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 16:46
Hullo gujimbo
Worth linking to 897312 which covered same subject
Some informed comments there, particularly (but not only) from Phil G
Cheers
Andrew
AnswerID: 469652

Follow Up By: Member - gujimbo - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 20:55

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 20:55
Thanks for the link Andrew,

I read about this camp fires issue in the latest TRACK WATCH magazine published by 4wd Victoria.

Cheers Jim
0
FollowupID: 744118

Reply By: Member - Robert R1 (SA) - Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:50

Thursday, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:50
A couple of years ago on a trip through the Kimberlies, in a number of National Park camps there were fire rings at several locations and the rangers supplied the fire wood. It was great. We (complete strangers) all sat around it, cooked our tea on it and got to know each other a little bit.

Regards,
Bob
And he sees the vision splendid of the sunlit plains extended, And at night the wondrous glory of the everlasting stars. Clancy of the Overflow.

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 469687

Follow Up By: caseh - Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 18:23

Friday, Nov 11, 2011 at 18:23
That's right Robert. We stayed at a number of National Parks in the South West of WA last year and there was a pile of firewood supplied at the campsites. The ranger came around as well and asked us if we had enough firewood. It was great. The only difference was that the firewood was all properly logged and split. No need to go into the bush and do any habitat destruction. I would happily pay a few dollars more if, like in these instances, the firewood was supplied.
The only comment I have on your post that the area is named Kimberley. Putting an 's" at the end of it is apparently a commonly done thing much to the annoyance of a radio reporter I listened to while cruising WA last year.

All good though.

Cheers, Case.
0
FollowupID: 744203

Reply By: Member - Gordon T (NSW) - Tuesday, Nov 15, 2011 at 09:34

Tuesday, Nov 15, 2011 at 09:34
Believing that this had not YET been decided, I emailed National Parks and received the following response:

"Thank you for your email regarding wood fires in Witjira National Park. At this stage wood fires, whether from wood sourced from the park or outside the park, have not been banned.

"The Witjira Co-management Board are proposing a ban on wood fires from January 2012, including wood sourced from outside the park. However, this is a proposal and is not yet been confirmed. Stakeholder consultation is still being undertaken and there are several issues that still need to be discussed and worked through.

"The Board (will) meet again early December 2011 to discuss this and other park matters, so the best I can offer you at this stage is that it is still a proposal and if it is determined that this proposal will be set into action, then notification of a ban will be communicated via the media, the Desert Parks Bulletin, and other means to inform people intending to travel. If the proposal does not go ahead, it will be business as usual."

I suggest that all parties concerned that this might restrict their enjoyment of the Park, make immediate written representations. Remember, if you don't write then you can't realistically object to the decision.
AnswerID: 470068

Reply By: luhuanhuan l - Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 at 17:29

Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 at 17:29
This post has been read by the moderation team and has been moderated due to a breach of The Spamming Rule .

Forum Moderation Team
AnswerID: 471019

Reply By: fisho64 - Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 at 19:25

Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 at 19:25
fire dangers aside, I enjoy a camp fire. In general its just a lazy way of law enforcement, like banning knives so they cant be used for a robbery.

Far better Id say to PROVIDE a safe area for a fire, and perhaps a quantity of firewood also.
As said above it will be a social area for those so inclined to share a yarn etc.
AnswerID: 471037

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)