Forget water meters, the real hot council issue these days is the new bylaw banning outdoor cooking fires. On one side, I didn't expect it, but now I know the passion people have for their outdoor wood fueled cook outs (some people keep the fire going long past the food being ready). A couple of the email headers from the past few weeks:
"Bring Back...Back Yard Family Weiner Roasts"
and
"Welcome to Dictatorship Kamloops"
And there is also this online petition, which mirrors several paper ones going around our fair community. My friend, September Weir, has even started a Facebook Cause.
On the other side, folks are also contacting council members to say how much they appreciate a bylaw that protects their ability to preserve the air quality in their neighborhoods. They want the ability to prevent smoke from fires on neighboring properties drifting into their yard and affecting their own enjoyment.
I have to side with the "please protect my air quality folks". Yes, your private yard is your private yard, but you should not be able to enjoy it when your activities detrimentally effect others.
That seems reasonable to me.
Look, even with new bylaw, the reality is that if you have an outdoor cooking fire that does not bother your neighbors, there is little chance the bylaw will be enforced in your situation. City staff are far too taxed to run around on cooking fire patrol. So, if you are a good neighbor and responsibly monitor your outdoor cooking fire - fill your boots, light your logs, have at er.
This "turn an initial blind eye unless there is a complaint" approach is exactly the same as city hall's approach with illegal suites.
I'm Arjun Singh and that's one man's opinion.
It's not me that said this, but I first heard it from a prof who was a Air Quality Specialist that had worked for the Federal Government:
"Americans have the right to bear arms. Canadians have the right to burn wood."
He was being somewhat sarcastic. It was in reference to "just try and meddle with that right" - facts or not. This comes from a recommendation that he had made in telling a BC airshed (not ours) that if they wanted to see improved air quality , they needed to stop burning wood. He was pretty much told to leave town - the politicians wouldn't touch that subject.
Well, I know the impacts particulates have on our breathing, so I would encourage you to keep pushing. Problem is, this is not a debate that facts matter much in.
Posted by: Chris | December 12, 2007 at 10:48 PM
Hey, nice spin on James' One Man's Opinion piece... You know, I've never had a backyard fire while living here in Kamloops, but I would like to. So, why is it that we can't do this like Vernon does? Apparently, there is no problem unless you are bothering the neighbours. I hear what you are saying, "go ahead and have fire..." I guess we could and when the keener bylaw officer stops by - will you pay the fine?
Thanks for being open for discussion.
Posted by: Donald | December 12, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Thanks for the comments gentlemen. We need to talk about difficult issues, thats the only way forward. Rachet down the rhetoric.
And, no, Donald, I won't pay your fine. Life ain't perfect!
Posted by: Arjun Singh | December 12, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Too bad. Can't fault a man for asking, though.
Posted by: Donald | December 13, 2007 at 06:42 AM
Hi Arjun.
I grew up with backyard bonfires that generally lasted long into the late night. We enjoyed the roasting of weiners and marshmallows as well as throwing potatoes into the pit and waiting an hour or two for them to cook. Back in that day, it wasn't unusual to throw some of your refuse on the fire to clear out some junk.
But things have changed, haven't they? We know that with an ever growing world population, these seemingly little pleasures quickly add up with many others' seemingly little pleasures and become a pollution problem that can effect us all.
We Canadians have long enjoyed our campfires and backyard bonfires. Just because something is a tradition or is enjoyable, does not mean it is right. We have to grow up and take a little responsibility for our place in this world.
If our city council looks at the air quality issues in Kamloops and recognizes that we need to make some changes, that's why we hire them.
If our city council looks at pesticide use and recognizes that pesticides are often carcinogenic compounds that affect the lives of people, animals and good insects negatively, they should address this issue.
We all find it hard to accept changes like this. It's never easy to have someone tell you what you're doing is wrong or harmful to someone else. The key is what do we do with this information? Let's be the city that faces these issues head on and makes it work, rather than sticking our heads in the mud.
This environmental stuff is only going to get more difficult and more restrictive, so we'd better get used to the idea that things are changing. It's for everyones' good.
Mike
Posted by: Mike | December 15, 2007 at 10:53 AM
It's not that I don't sympathise with those with lung problems. If I had such problems however, I'd move to the country where the air my special lungs required would fit my special needs. I feel it unfair to ask society at large to change their human behaviour to meet the select needs of the select few. (I agree that this puts me in that same category..but what must be measured is the benefit vs the harm)
Should I remove the peanut butter from my house to avoid the possibility of a peanut challenged kid from the possibilty of an accident?
What I didn't say in my letter, or to you, is that I also happen to burn wood in my house. (yes, it's indeed our primary heat source) The fire is going pretty much 24/7 from Nov to Feb . We burn roughly 3 cords of wood every winter.
I'm reluctant to say so, because of course, that will be the next thing. It does make our little hot dog fire pale in comparison doesn't it?
I know of people with health problems who move to drier places to fulfill their health needs..and people with allergies perhaps move to cities as well to lower the spore count the country supplies.
The small number of fires, and their minimal impact of the smoke on what few people pass my house (especially in winter, where there's 20,000 cars passing per every little fire) (ok..I'll be honest..I haven't actually counted, but Todd Rd is pretty busy) it's really, a case of not seeing the forest for the trees..
It's pretty clear to me that no council member has a firepit in their back yard. We have our hot dogs, our 'mellows, and ok..a few drinks..and out it goes. The fires when we have them we might see 5 people walk by..and maybe also 150 cars over 3 hours!
Perhaps one of these people walking by might have serious lung issues. I guess for their benefit , they might have the pleasure of their Todd fume fresh air, and I'll be inside my house, as I'm no excercise nut by any stretch of the imagination. I personally have no reason to enjoy the outdoors but for that odd fire, and I've very serious that it might be 3 in total over the winter! (if that)
My mind swirls!
I think a more sensible alternative would be to limit fires to properties of 1 acre or more...(if they must be limited) I know of one family on Klahanie where their small property has fires from time to time, where many neighbours share the fun!
If weiner fires were such a really bad problem in Kamloops, I'm sure that you yourself would remember experiencing them. I'd bet my back teeth, you don't even personally know of one.
BTW..also against metering.Kamloops is a semi desert. I got a ride once from a Kelowna guy saying he hates Kamloops cuz it's so dusty and dirty. If we want a green space in a desert, then metering will certainly stifle that. Not every visitor to town measures Kamloops by its Marigold mile!
Posted by: Pat Leibel | December 20, 2007 at 02:39 PM
Hey Arjun, i am not sure if you saw my letter to the editor about our clean and green city but I just wanted to comment about the facebook "cause" which demands:
If you want to have an impact on local air quality, insist the pulp mill meet their pollution targets.
Like a letter I wrote earlier this year.. I think that as a society we should take personal responsibility for keeping our planet clean and not resort to saying things like "well I'll clean up my act when you do." It's immature.
http://pic1.picturetrail.com/VOL1175/3971823/8232401/294058908.jpg
Burning wood in our backyards? jeez louise.
I'm just as Canadian as the next guy and I've never seen that as "part of my heritage."
That's is as much a part of my Canadian Heritage as putting cheeze whiz on toast.. while watching Mr. Dress Up *that's Canadian right?*
If we don't put water meters in place we'll all be dying of thirst while rolling around in our green luscious yards.
LAME.
Peace my brother.
Joey Jack
Posted by: Joey Jack | December 21, 2007 at 12:16 AM
My family just moved up here from the Vancouver area in August and I have not noticed any issues with backyard fires. Being new to the area I thought that the issue revolved around fires escaping. After reading more into it, I now see that it has to do with air quality.
This to me is absurd.
From my point of view, a bigger problem here with air quality is not with the occasional fire, it is with the non-air cared cars. To get your dose of pollutants, just go to your local shop’s parking lot. I would think that in the grand scheme of things, cars let out WAY more pollutants and carcinogenics then the occasional back yard fire.
I have a hard time figuring out why the council is focusing on the little issues, when there are obviously bigger offenders out there. I think that priorities may need to be re-checked.
Posted by: Kira and Scott | December 24, 2007 at 09:56 AM
I do not believe the focus is air quality or the enviroment. With pressure on local air quality from so many sources, why would backyard cooking fires get the priority? By waving the "save the enviroment" flag, any cause can get serious attention.
All of our yards can be effected by our neibours actions. Idling vehicles too long, spraying pestasides, improperly tuned lawn mowers and snowblowers, cigarette smoke even other peoples outdoor cooking. These are all issue's people work out with each other, it is part of living in a comunity. If the "save the enviroment" flag is raised on any of these subjects, what level of attention will they get from city hall?
Bylaws of this nature provide an outlet for faceless complaints from people who choose not to comunicate with their neighbours first. 1 or 2 unhappy people can split up a neighbourhood.
With industrial pressure's, a lack of vehicle air care and other serisous impacts on our enviroment, I do not understand how backyard cooking fires received such a priority.
With actual enviromental issues that effect us all, and issues on our streets that effect us all. We need City Hall to demonstrate leadership by dealing with actual serious issues and not dictate how people conduct themselves in their own yard.
buck
Posted by: buck | December 26, 2007 at 05:22 PM
I think if people had a child or loved one suffering from asthma they would understand how hard wood smoke is on the lungs. Go to the BC Lung Association web site and learn some facts. Yes, we need to bring AirCare to the Interior. Yes, we need Domtar to reduce emissions. These problems need to be addressed but a wood fire next door is by far a greater problem for an asthmatic child than Domtar or a passing car. Take your kids up into the hills and go sledding. Build a small fire and roast marshmallows. Have a great time. Just let your neighbour breathe in peace. Is that too much to ask?
Posted by: Jake | December 27, 2007 at 02:30 PM
I can't believe that our city would turn a blind eye towards the slash burning fires in Sahali and threaten over a small cooking fire in the back yard. Remember, that wood is a renewable resource when natural gas and brickettes are not.
Russ
Posted by: Russ | January 14, 2008 at 06:54 PM
I think it's shameful that the same council that happily bent over and allowed Domtar to have its way with our air quality and health would try something this petty.
It seems that this current council wants to keep Kamloops as a 'dirty, stinky pulp mill town' in order to deter business and new residents.
Posted by: Guy N Cognito | January 19, 2008 at 12:32 PM