Ambiguous guidelines and rule lawyering.

[Gadgetgeek]

Just a question for the brain trust. On my little trip this week we used a "remote" as in no services campsite in a NSW national park. While there, the site was also used by a a family who decided that they should light a campfire. As my group left, I mentioned to the gentleman that his fire was very likely illegal (I wasn't 100% on the rule, I've since checked and fires are not allowed in that area) and that closure of that site, and or revocation of permits were a great risk to my organization. His response was that the sign at the site reads "please use fuel stoves and avoid the use of campfires" Which to him meant, please don't, but its okay if you do. So of course his kids were dragging deadfall out of the bush and they had a pretty decent fire going. He was a nice enough guy, but basically told me that the rules apply only how he wants them too. I'll be back in a week, and I don't doubt that there will still be the evidence of the fire. Hopefully we will have time to clean it up, as well as haul out another couple packs full of trash.

So what's the move? Report him? Walk away? On the one hand he's a guy trying to get his kids out in the wilderness which is something I approve of, but his actions could contribute to the site getting closed, in which case it makes it harder for us to get kids out in the woods that won't otherwise get the chance. Commercial operators and recreational users have loud voices, but the educational section seems to get the stick most of the time. I was also very disappointed in the general state of the campsite, but its close enough to roads to be on a dayhike, and I guess not everyone feels the need to take their drink bottles back out with them.

[neilmny]

Tough question Gadgetgeek and his interpretation of the sign is not exactly outrageous.
If the service wants to stop people lighting fires the sign should read "Lighting of Fires Prohibited" no risk of misinterpretation in that.
Places in Vic. like Mt. Bogong have a sign "Fuel Stove Only Area", not much risk of wrong interpretation there either.
Maybe a message to NSW Parks that you observed people with camp fires and that those people interpreted the signage as "avoid" means optional as opposed to banned.
A tough question. Don't walk away they need to know the signs don't deliver a clear message.

[yogibarnes]

Gadgetgeek
Why do you say "fires are not allowed in that area"?

[ribuck]

As far as I know, signs with "please" and "avoid" are only used when there is no legal prohibition, but the authorities want to discourage some action anyway. For example, the official sign says "Please don't camp on Mt Solitary" yet fortunately camping there is not prohibited yet. When the time comes that not so many people camp on Mt Solitary, the authorities will probably move in with prohibition.

In your case, if you have since checked and found a prohibition, it's likely that the sign was erected before prohibition, and has not been updated since.

I think it's great that the family were using a renewable resource to warm themselves, rather than a fossil fuel to warm the globe. I'd be relaxed about this. I don't think there's any realistic risk that your permit will be revoked because someone else had a campfire.

[Gadgetgeek]

Yogibarnes, the website for that particular campsite and general area has camp fires under its "prohibited" category, along with pets.

Ribuck, to the best of my understanding the wood there is not exactly a "renewable resource" as it is a pretty delicate sand dune environment. So the trees grow slowly, and the deadfall is important erosion cover. As for the permit. Who looses first when there are restrictions? tourists who spend money? Commercial operators who provide jobs? or non-profits who don't really put much into the local economy? You are probably right, but a loss is a loss.

[ribuck]

Gadgetgeek, it goes without saying that whether a campfire is appropriate depends on local factors. However, as you haven't identified the campsite, my comments relate to my interpretation of the sign.

Here's an old photo of a sign in the Blue Mountains where the wording makes it clear that, although the authorities are asking people not to have a campfire, campfires are not prohibited.

[Gadgetgeek]

Ribuck, fair enough. the wording on the sign was far simpler, with no mention of dead wood, just the "avoid using fires". The fact that every other sign in the entire park has either fires not permitted or the graphic fire with a red slash was the indication to me.