Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

wood fires at Arapiles 8-Jun-2011 At 12:58:46 PM crazyjohn

Message

First of all, I am opposed to the increase in the permanent fire ban at Arapiles. So far, the only official reason given for the ban is a Parks officer reporting that scientific studies show that collecting firewood decreases biodiversity. Of course, many more reasons for the ban have been brought up by users of this forum. However, this one reason has been the only one given by the committee in the very limited discussions I have had with them.

However, Parks already knows all this! That is why firewood collection within the park is already illegal. What the committee has not addressed and the obviously controversial crux of the whole issue is- Why does the committee feel that the biodiversity is under major threat and why are the current rules not working? This is difficult to address because the committee is being intentionally aloof about their reasons. They do not appear to be interested in any discussion. People opposed to the ban are left to imagine the reasons why the committee thinks the current Parks rules have failed.

As has been pointed out, “firewood gathering” can be in many forms; from the use of four-wheel drives and chainsaws to the collection of some twigs and bracken to start a fire using wood obtained outside the park. There is anecdotal evidence that users are burning wood gathered in the park. However, there is also overwhelming anecdotal evidence (and probably scientific) that in the last 25 years the park has had a great increase in biodiversity.

It may be uncontroversial that firewood gathering decreases biodiversity. It is also uncontroversial that banning camping and climbing would also increase biodiversity. However, maintaining biodiversity is not the only concern of the Mt Arapiles-Tooan management plan. Recreational use in the camping zones is also a primary concern and having campfires is a big part of that recreation. Moving from “gathering firewood decreases biodiversity” to “climbers at Arapiles are destroying the biodiversity at Arapiles by collecting firewood and therefore recreational use needs to be curbed” is excessive and unsubstantiated.

I do not believe that there is a critically destructive level of firewood gathering at Arapiles. But let us assume that there is an unacceptable level of firewood gathering, as the committee supposedly does. What do we do about it? What the committee is saying is basically that:

1. The users of Arapiles are destroying the biodiversity of the park by gathering firewood.
2. There is no point in even attempting to engage the users of the park in discussion about this destructive behaviour or attempt any kind of user/climber based solution.
3. The only way to stop this destructive behaviour is to go above the users of the park and have Parks enforce a fire ban on everyone.

In the last 6 days since Louise deigned to inform this forum of the committee’s decision about the fire ban, there have been many imaginative suggestions about how the users of Arapiles could curb the gathering of wood. Perhaps 6 months ago, when the committee started its “deliberation” they could have mentioned the idea to the common users of the park in order to get some of this great input. Considering that the committee tried EXACTLY NOTHING in the last 6 months to stop firewood gathering, it is wrong to take the absolute last step of requesting an outright ban. I don't think the committee has the right to ask Parks to solve their perceived problems without trying anything user-based first.

One final reason I am opposed to the ban. Lets assume that firewood gathering in Arapiles is at some sort of critical emergency stage (Im not convinced it is). Parks is apparently unable to enforce the current illegal practices of firewood gathering. How is forcing Parks to monitor even more illegal activities supposed to work? The assumption is that the users of the park will not want to break the new law. My question is why would they break one law and not the other? The obvious reason is that users are not aware that gathering wood is such a serious problem. Otherwise, if they are just careless criminals it would make no difference what laws you had. How will users be aware that the new ban is in place? BY PUTTING UP A BIG SIGN! Well, obviously, a big sign that tells users in no uncertain terms firewood gathering is illegal may work. Logically it has the same chance as putting up a big sign that bans fires!

I will be challenging this ban in every way I can. I hope other people will too!