UKH

The BMC have launched a 'No Moor BBQs' campaign, after countless devastating moorland fires. They are calling on the government to criminalise the use of disposable barbeques on open moorland, with a severe penalty for anyone caught.

Good idea! Those BBQs are a curse. I'm normally against the idea of banning things but they have caused so many problems. Visiting the Peak is becoming increasingly depressing; so many more places seem to be trashed these days and the litter line gets higher all the time.

I think part of the problem is with the name, disposable means throw it away doesn't it and that's what they do. Can we rename them 'take it back home with you BBQs'? I occasionally find them around the cliffs on Portland, I would have expected better of climbers.

I'm a little bit disappointed the hyperlink to the article wasn't "Read moor".

Pun aside. I remember those "bucket BBQs" were the rage a few years back. They weren't marketed as disposable but the price was still so low people were treating them as such, and even where they kept the bbq, still-hot coals weren't always disposed of properly.

My shopping trips are utilitarian rather than leisure so I haven't been into the summer tat aisle (or the beach) to notice if they're in vogue this year. They're the obvious loophole to a ban targeting disposables. Or a roasting tin, plant pot, metal pail etc...

Other countries have outright fire bans during wildfire season. In my view, this seems a better way of going about things than bans on certain product categories. Unfair on the responsible maybe, but seems the only chance of stopping or punishing those intent on acting carelessly.

I despair at it. Well done to BMC for trying to do something at least.

The manufacture of disposable barbeques should be banned.

I doubt the bulk of them are manufactured inside of UK jurisdiction, but I agree with the sentiment.

Import, sales and use are probably the most potent angles we have. The (assumed) minority we might manufacture would be a nice icing on the cake.

I've just fished my MP's flyer out of the recycle bin, because he states:

"After receiving confirmation from Parliament that existing by-law legislation is sufficient to introduce a local ban, XXX, will be working with local authorities to agree the best ways to do this."

I guess this is a standard bit of blurb, put out by parties for constituencies with moors.

Much as I would like to see this succeed, I'm unsure how it would work. Will the police be wandering over the fells? Will park rangers be expected to confront groups of rowdy BBQ users, in the middle of nowhere? If I see someone cooking a burger do I provide a grid ref, then carry on?

A better solution might be to stick a £5 environment tax on then, with the money going to the national parks and fire service. This would reduce use not only in national parks, but beaches, town parks, woods and everywhere else people seem to need to BBQ and leave rubbish.

When I briefly lived in BC, you could expect a stern word, fine and instruction to douse the fire and disperse issued by the mounties.

The only run ins I had with RCMP were attending a house party that got broken up and weekend 1 when I hadn't yet learned you couldn't enjoy a cider in public.  They carried guns and inspired me to pay attention. Seems they had time to police such matters.

Park wardens were also about to check camping permits etc and could issue fines or call for RCMP.

Rules by themselves only seem likely to stop fires caused by citizens/supply chain that abide by every letter of the law. I think it's a good step, but I'm pessimistic for the impact.

I like the additional tax idea provided it actually got to those public services, unlike all the current taxes do. Putting the cost of disposal or recycling onto things at the point of manufacture/import/sale is another area where I think we are behind. See: refundable deposits on cans and bottles.  Where people are still too lazy or inconsiderate to clean up after themselves, picking up litter becomes an income source for others.  People are incentivised to tidy up.  Crazy that that's necessary.

However if I was in the shoes of someone displeased at the tax rate on bbq and intent on acting as selfishly as possible I might then consider burning some vegetation or fencing and grilling over that.  Sometimes I think the only option is not to reproduce and console myself that eventually it will all succumb to the heat death of the universe or spiral into a celestial body.

Canada seem to me to be a better job of keeping the outdoors tolerable until that does happen though.

This has the benefit of adding the incentive of cleaning up. I don't supposed a bunch of p*ssed people will clear up their cans of stella, if they cost an extra 10p. There is no shortage of broke people who desperately need to earn a bit of cash on the side. Some would be keen to wander around picking up cans, if it meant they could get an extra few quid.

This does present an ethical conundrum. Do you want an underclass of people picking rubbish, because the state cannot support them. Or does it show pluck and initiative, recycling for financial and environmental benefit.

I think that goes on anyway.

This campaign just shows how petty and ideological the BMC is. 

If they were following the science, they would be launching a campaign against the rump aristocracy's enormously damaging land management practices: chiefly, drainage and so-called "controlled" burning, which are the real threat to moorland biodiversity and, along with climate change, create the preconditions for moorland becoming a tinderbox. See: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/04/grouse-shoots-scrapped-as-h...

But, no... that would "political", "controversial", "risk the constructive relationship we've established with landowners..."

So... let's speculate that it was "probably some plebs with a bbq" rather than addressing the root causes. And... before long we'll have a thread of comments as long as your arm singling out working-class people and calling for the typical authoritarian response: arrests, fines, bans...



 

Agreed, good points. 

Little mention of the massive waste created through "appropriate" use of throw-away BBQs either, which I believe is the main reason for a suggested sale ban previously / to date. 

Yep, lots of homeless people in Vancouver pushing around shopping trolleys full of cans. Does the cash help them out or fund a habit and vicious cycle?  Probably a bit of both.  Absolutely not a foolproof recipe for utopia.

Less depressingly, a flat full of ski bums stoked that their latest 24 was "free" after cashing in the huge pyramid of empties off the windowsill. Or closer to home, the muddy festival goer on free beer after picking up a tower of cups.  Cleaner environment, no brainer!

I would add wind farms to your list.

https://theconversation.com/wind-farms-built-on-carbon-rich-peat-bogs-lose-...

Does it need to be either/or?

A campaign for land management takes away the fuel.

A campaign for reduced use of disposable bbqs (might) take away (one of) the ignition sources. Or at least the litter, which would be still be there, just soggier if we only did land management.

I won't suggest a campaign against oxygen, which would complete the fire triangle. Though it might be most effective at putting an end to this and other human-created issues.

Be careful what you wish for.

Any legislation that applies to disposable barbeques could also affect responsible wild campers, cigarette smokers or  brew makers on a walk/climb if not carefully drafted.

I'm sure its been said in the above comments, but just ban them altogether. Living in Dorset and working on the coast these things are a nightmare. Left on the beaches, ashes still hot or buried under the sand/shingle waiting for someone to step on them. 
If not ban altogether, make them only allowable at an actual residence.

How are you meant to take them away though? That's half the problem. People are daft enough to take them out into the Peak (I've even seen some using them in a patch completely surrounded by dry heather) and then realise they can't just take them home because they're hot.

Sadly, some seem to lack the grey matter to anticipate this being an issue.

Agree, charcoal bbqs are a lot less portable and spontaneous than how they are marketed.

I think I hate the ones that leave a smouldering bbq most, but it's closely contested by the ones that "solve" the problem by lashing the whole thing into a body of water, or douse the heat out but still leave the wreckage because they dont want the ashy slurry to leak out into their hands/car while they take it away for disposal.

I bought one that butterflies up to help burn up all the fuel. You can do that, open it back up to cool down, then drench it till it stops sizzling, put it in its "fireman suit" case, and it will still be a nervous drive home with the windows down while it pumps out CO and somehow warms itself back up.

Two separate issues here, I think. People found to be setting fire to moorland - accidentally or otherwise - should face a hefty punishment, potentially including a prison sentence. I'm not one for justice solutions to social problems normally, but it's a serious problem that needs a serious deterrent. It's not rocket science that hot things set fire to dry plants, so I don't think it's too disproportionate. It throws up the second issue though that people accidentally setting fire to the hillside might take the opportunity to practice their E&E instead of calling the fire brigade. Tricky problem.

The manufacture and sale of disposable BBQs should be banned on principle - the world doesn't need more single-use shit, and the world doesn't need more opportunities for the lazy brigade to litter.

At the end of the day, controlled burning is what it says on the tin. 

None of the recent catastrophic moorland fires were directly attributable to controlled burning: either vandalism or negligence was to blame.

 Your politics might want  to point the finger elsewhere, but even in a Monbiot approved mixture of heath and scrubland devoid of sheep and grouse, the disposable barbecue and its users would still present a massive and unjustifiable fire risk.

At the end of the day, when all's said and done, and the writing's on the wall... blah blah blah.

Tom V: you're completely wrong. The science suggests that controlled burning and drainage makes moorland far more susceptible to fire, carbon release and flooding. Just because this point is inevitably political, doesn't make it a "leftist fantasy". It just means you have to grow up and accept the political character of reality.

Sure, disposable bbqs aren't great. But, the actual reason for targetting them is precisely that we - ordinary people and consumers - don't have the entrenched power of landowners, making such a moralising campaign so easy and neat, compared to the much more difficult task of addressing the destruction that results from the  inequities wealth, land and power distribution in the UK.