5 Responses to “Keep Fire Rings in Newport Beach, Coastal Commission Staff Report Says”
February 24th, 2013
So the rings are "a unique recreational facility for which there is no substitution..." Can't you barbecue in any of the City's or the State's parks? Do people really need scores of fire rings big enough to smelt iron ore?
February 25th, 2013
We need the fire rings! My family uses them for our Youth Group, Boy Scouts and family nights at the beach. We are locals too! All of the people complaining knew the rings were there when they bought the house, if they want a sterile beach then a gated community might be a better choice. The reality is that the rings are only active during the summer months. If people are concerned about air quaility, then there are a number of environmental organziations that could use some money and influence to improve our air quality.
February 25th, 2013
I urge everyone to read the letters from the experts, not mentioned in this article, but included in the staff report. A doctor from the California Department of Public Health, who developed the public health and medical foundations for California's air quality standards said, "It is unquestionable that exposure to wood smoke can cause a variety of effects, ranging from irritation of the eyes and respiratory tract, to serious lung infections, exacerbation of asthma and other chronic lung disease." Isn't an unquestionable health risk worthy of considering another form of lower cost public recreation? And another letter, "The American Lung Association in California is writing to express concern about the use of fire rings on public beaches, due to harmful exposures from smoke caused by burning wood. With the scientific evidence linking wood smoke pollution to lung disease, heart disease and premature death, no one should be involuntarily exposed."
February 26th, 2013
@David, the fire rings are such a unique recreational facility, and for the city of newport, even grilling in public is unique. The City of Newport Beach has a law on the books stating that in public areas, including the beaches and the parks, you are not allowed to have a fire in anything other than a city provided container e.g. the pits or the city provided grills. So if the pits were to be removed, it only leaves a handful of city provided grills total between the peninsula and big corona for you to cook your food. Where the pits are taken up quickly in the summer, the city provided grills are taken up faster. So using the excuse that people can just grill their food at the beach is not a valid replacement for removing the pits.
July 2nd, 2013
After all the discussions with Senate Representatives, Assemblyman, Mayor's, City Councils, the AQMD's approach to this was shady. They wanted a quiet transition to please a friend of someone who is on the BOD of the AQMD. This is America and we are entitled to vote on any decisions that effect our lives. Put the whole thing to a vote before a decision is made. It has already been admitted by the AQMD that there are other abusers of air quality much worse than fire pits. These are areas enjoyed by the masses and affordably so. Why does the AQMD find other abusers they already admit exist to enforce these laws upon.$$$$ Disneyland has a nightly firework display causing much more pollution of the area along with Knott's, Angel Stadium. It seems to be that certain residents are suffering from smoke caused by fire pits near their homes. Well, they can afford it, MOVE. Why make everyone else suffer. Letting each city vote seems to be the fairest approach to this problem...