Complaints to the GUARDIAN could dwindle fast if the Ada Commishes keep doing things like amending county ordinance #744 to eliminate the requirement for burning permits in rural areas while still maintaining air quality rules. The law was never enforced anyway.
At the request of the Ada County Fire Chiefs Association, the Board of Ada County Commissioners signed an ordinance in late February that discontinues the issuance of burning permits. Open burning is still allowed in rural areas, provided the weather forecast permits it and the Air Quality Index (AQI) is at 60 or below.
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Mar 25, 2010, 4:53 pm
Is each citizen entitled to define “rural area” to his own satisfaction? (Why can’t us city slickers burn a pile of limbs on a day when there aren’t air quality issues? My personal opinion is that the pileup in the landfill has more environmental impact than burning something like that.)
I checked out the link to the Air Quality page… they don’t allow people to burn tires and dead animals? When did that happen? (Nudge-nudge, wink-wink)
Mar 25, 2010, 6:48 pm
I can think of no good reason for open burning of any kind. There are states where they seem to get by just fine without this method of refuse control. In some states agricultural burning has not been allowed for decades.
Ask anyone with respiratory issues like COPD or Asthma how they feel about open burning. The “controlled burns”done by the forest service are bad enough.
Trash burning and yard debris do not need to be burned. It stinks, it pollutes, and is a major annoyance to people who would like to keep their windows open during warmer times of year. It is a practice that is very inconsiderate of your neighbors long distances from the burn site.
Mar 25, 2010, 8:34 pm
I live in Gem County, just outside Emmett. Here, people who live inside the city limits are required to phone dispatch and notify the Fire Department when they plan a burn, and can be fined for failing to do so. Outside the city limits, residents are strongly urged, but not required, to do the same.
The main purpose is simply so they don’t have to send out fire trucks every time somebody calls in and says, “I see smoke down the road a ways,” and rush out to find it’s only someone burning off some weeds or a pile of branches or somesuch.
Dunno what specific laws are on what one can and cannot burn legally, but do know that when someone not far from us was burning tree trimmings or somesuch and decided to add tires, the firefighters came out and hosed it down, and sheriff’s deputies came out and had a chat with the man.
Other than that, the rule seems to be: Don’t burn when the wind is strong enough to send the flames flying beyond where you want them to be, and have someone around to keep an eye on the fire.
The system seems to work well.
Mar 26, 2010, 11:32 am
I have to agree with Paul on this one.
Mar 26, 2010, 11:44 am
Nice photo. I bet there is an interesting story behind it.
Mar 26, 2010, 12:42 pm
Steve: LOGIC tells me that coppers were at fault the MAJORITY of the time they collided with the public for whatever reason. 16 out of 30 is not much to be proud of! No info as to whether they were inattentive, reckless, texting, rushing to save a maiden in distress or just worse drivers than those with whom they collided.
Mar 30, 2010, 9:27 am
LOGIC tells me that “Mr. Logic’s” comment was intended to go with another story.
(-;