Jump to content


Photo

Backyard Campfires


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 LisaP

LisaP

    Thoroughly addicted

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,512 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 09:46 AM

Backyard campfires are illegal in Windsor and carries up to a $50,000 fine. This includes fires in chimnea's and contained fire pits/containers. In Kingsville it is illegal unless you buy a permit. How does paying for a permit make it safe? Do you think small backyard fires should be allowed if done responsibly? Do you find it odd that so many stores sell fire containers if it's not legal to use them?



#2 Trea

Trea

    M2M member since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,797 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 12:24 PM

They are legal in LaSalle. The by-law changed a couple of years ago. It used to be that you could have a "contained fire used for cooking". Basically if it was in a fire ring and you had some marshmallows you were legal. Now though you are allowed to have a small fire as long as you have a means of extinguishing it at hand.

 

I see no problem with them but, I know that younger people tend to think "bigger is better" and have bonfires instead of backyard fires. How do you police something like that? Where houses are close together there is a risk to neighbouring houses from sparks.

 

Reporting fires, in most places, has always been complaint driven so, I guess it could still be complaint driven. With it being 100% illegal then any complaint they get about a fire can result in a charge. Therefore less "false" reporting and needless visits. But, if policing size of fires is complaint driven then there may be more nuisance complaints. Some, if not many, cases the fires will be found to be within "acceptable limits". Therefore the trip for the responders is wasted when they could have been tending to more pressing issues.



#3 Mama2Gracie

Mama2Gracie

    So in love with my saving Grace

  • Sponsors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,329 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 01:33 PM

I miss having bonfires. I'd give anything to have a real s'more lol. The problem is that idiots ruin it for the everyday people. The people who drink and stumble into the fire, don't use basic safety or the "woah! Lets see what happens when we throw this book case in there".

#4 Alphabet_Soup

Alphabet_Soup

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 08:52 AM

I know when my dad gets his permit back home(northern Ontario), the fire department has to come inspect his fire pit to make sure it's in a safe place, access to water and whatnot. Our neighbours have fires all the time, I don't usually mind. The only time I do mind is when they get loud and rowdy.



#5 cbarker78

cbarker78

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,587 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 09:11 AM

The City is considering permits as well and it's just another stupid cash grab! 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 

That closed fire pits, like the chimnea's are illegal too is just dumb!!! They're not OPEN fires, like an old rim in the ground is!! If anyone wants to get rid of their above ground fire pit/bowl or chimnea because they don't want to risk the fine, let me know and I will gladly assume that risk ;)  

 

LOL! 



#6 Trea

Trea

    M2M member since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,797 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:26 AM

 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 


LOL! 

 My parents used to invite all the immediate neighbours to all their bigger parties. This way the neighbours were at the party and had nothing to complain about LOL.



#7 LisaP

LisaP

    Thoroughly addicted

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,512 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:29 AM

The City is considering permits as well and it's just another stupid cash grab! 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 

That closed fire pits, like the chimnea's are illegal too is just dumb!!! They're not OPEN fires, like an old rim in the ground is!! If anyone wants to get rid of their above ground fire pit/bowl or chimnea because they don't want to risk the fine, let me know and I will gladly assume that risk ;)

 

LOL! 

 

It is a cash grab, it's funny how something that is so "dangerous" becomes safe if you give them a few bucks to look the other way. In the long run it will probably cost us tax payers, they will have to hire people to go around checking to see that fires have permits and that they are within the guidelines of the permit.  



#8 Cowboy From Hell

Cowboy From Hell

    Just getting started

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 12:30 PM

 

The City is considering permits as well and it's just another stupid cash grab! 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 

That closed fire pits, like the chimnea's are illegal too is just dumb!!! They're not OPEN fires, like an old rim in the ground is!! If anyone wants to get rid of their above ground fire pit/bowl or chimnea because they don't want to risk the fine, let me know and I will gladly assume that risk ;)

 

LOL! 

 

It is a cash grab, it's funny how something that is so "dangerous" becomes safe if you give them a few bucks to look the other way. In the long run it will probably cost us tax payers, they will have to hire people to go around checking to see that fires have permits and that they are within the guidelines of the permit.  

 

 

That's the way it should be. If it is simply "pay money and you are allowed a fire with no kind of check", then yeah, that's a cash grab. But if inspections are being done, how can you call it a cash grab? It's a health and safety situation. Permits/licenses are required for all kinds of things. Should we just take those away as well?



#9 LisaP

LisaP

    Thoroughly addicted

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,512 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 02:13 PM

 

 

The City is considering permits as well and it's just another stupid cash grab! 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 

That closed fire pits, like the chimnea's are illegal too is just dumb!!! They're not OPEN fires, like an old rim in the ground is!! If anyone wants to get rid of their above ground fire pit/bowl or chimnea because they don't want to risk the fine, let me know and I will gladly assume that risk ;)

 

LOL! 

 

It is a cash grab, it's funny how something that is so "dangerous" becomes safe if you give them a few bucks to look the other way. In the long run it will probably cost us tax payers, they will have to hire people to go around checking to see that fires have permits and that they are within the guidelines of the permit.  

 

 

That's the way it should be. If it is simply "pay money and you are allowed a fire with no kind of check", then yeah, that's a cash grab. But if inspections are being done, how can you call it a cash grab? It's a health and safety situation. Permits/licenses are required for all kinds of things. Should we just take those away as well?

 

 

I am not at all against permits in general, I realize they are necessary and for our own safety however I don't want to have to pay extra taxes to enforce something that may not be necessary as in this case. I question if this type of permit is really needed. How is a contained fire in a proper container any different than a BBQ, is a fire legal only as long as you are cooking on it? I'm not saying that people should be able to just heap a pile of logs in their backyards and burn them but what is wrong with a small fire in an approved container? Another thing that doesn't make sense, if there is a by-law that you can't use fire containers why isn't there a by-law that they can't be sold?

 

 



#10 Trea

Trea

    M2M member since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,797 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:21 AM

 

 

 

The City is considering permits as well and it's just another stupid cash grab! 

 

I'm lucky that all of my neighbours around me have pits and are responsible and reasonable about them! A couple weeks back one gave me the heads up that they were having a party to celebrate something and would *try* to keep the noise down. I thought that was really kind of him to give me a heads up!! ((And yeah they were noisy, but not horribly so))

 

That closed fire pits, like the chimnea's are illegal too is just dumb!!! They're not OPEN fires, like an old rim in the ground is!! If anyone wants to get rid of their above ground fire pit/bowl or chimnea because they don't want to risk the fine, let me know and I will gladly assume that risk ;)

 

LOL! 

 

It is a cash grab, it's funny how something that is so "dangerous" becomes safe if you give them a few bucks to look the other way. In the long run it will probably cost us tax payers, they will have to hire people to go around checking to see that fires have permits and that they are within the guidelines of the permit.  

 

 

That's the way it should be. If it is simply "pay money and you are allowed a fire with no kind of check", then yeah, that's a cash grab. But if inspections are being done, how can you call it a cash grab? It's a health and safety situation. Permits/licenses are required for all kinds of things. Should we just take those away as well?

 

 

I am not at all against permits in general, I realize they are necessary and for our own safety however I don't want to have to pay extra taxes to enforce something that may not be necessary as in this case. I question if this type of permit is really needed. How is a contained fire in a proper container any different than a BBQ, is a fire legal only as long as you are cooking on it? I'm not saying that people should be able to just heap a pile of logs in their backyards and burn them but what is wrong with a small fire in an approved container? Another thing that doesn't make sense, if there is a by-law that you can't use fire containers why isn't there a by-law that they can't be sold?

 

 

 

 

The thing is some people will abuse it if fires are allowed with no sort of permit. Where houses are close together it is a safety issue! if people have to pay for a permit and know they will be inspected then it will deter more of the unsafe backyard fires from happening. Some places have yards so small that their neighbours are less than 10' away. Should they be allowed to have fires with no sort of controls over it? Downtown Windsor for example. One fire in someone's backyard where someone decided to be stupid and houses flames! The houses are old, and close together with garages off alleyways. How do you write a by-law that is not exclusionary yet protects people who live in areas like that? Permits.

 

As for selling something that is illegal to use. It is NOT illegal for all of the county. If I want to buy something in the city to use in my 9acre yard in LaSalle where fires are legal should I not be allowed to do so?



#11 cbarker78

cbarker78

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,587 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 03:17 PM

there's nothing to stop the ones who get permits from abusing it either.... more often than not ((with this type of thing)) those who get permits can get a very "hoyty-toyty " attitude ("I have a permit so I can do what I want...")

 

Even in old neighbourhoods with houses close together, it is still possible to have a responsible fire and not worry about any damage to any one else's property.... the key is responsibility!! 



#12 Trea

Trea

    M2M member since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,797 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:21 PM

there's nothing to stop the ones who get permits from abusing it either.... more often than not ((with this type of thing)) those who get permits can get a very "hoyty-toyty " attitude ("I have a permit so I can do what I want...")

 

Even in old neighbourhoods with houses close together, it is still possible to have a responsible fire and not worry about any damage to any one else's property.... the key is responsibility!! 

 

 

I'm not so sure on this. When I did live in the city, on a small west-end lot, my downstairs neighbour had fires in our backyard. Even with mid sized fires, nothing I'd call irresponsible, we had live, hot ash/coals spark up onto our deck on the house. The fire pit was about 1/3 of the way toward the back of the yard. That put it only about 10' away from the house. (I never measured it, just a estimate).  Sure, the danger is very minimal that it would start a fire, but, that danger is there. Thankfully our fire response and fighting abilitites are much better than when by-laws like this were made. That also helps to decrease the risks. How about in a neighbourhood like the town-house condos in Walkerville? Or other town-houses that are not condos? Should they be allowed to have fires in their tiny backyards? Any by-law allowing fires would allow either have to have a "space" clause in it.  By issuing permits, they collect money to pay for the policing of backyard fires, those fires with and without permits, where no money is currently being collected to pay for the policing. Currently that comes out of the city budget. With permits they would be able to defer at least some of the costs onto those who want to have fires. This means people who couldn't care less about having a fire wouldn't have to pay for the policing of fires.

 

Being able to have fires is one of the reasons I don't live in the city. it is one tiny piece of the puzzle that makes me a county dweller.



#13 tabbs

tabbs

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,304 posts

Posted 01 August 2013 - 03:20 PM

Buying a permit doesn't make it safer, it allows the 911 operator to know that when they get an open burn complaint that they do not have to dispatch a fire truck.  A list of permits are sent to the dispatch office every week.  When a fire truck is dispatch it costs all the tax payers money and the home owner will get a fine. 

 

So it is not a cash grab but rather a cost savings for all of us.

 

Also the retailers really don't care about the local laws.  They just want to sell the product.  It is up to the purchaser to understand the local by-laws.