This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Blog: The Arguments Against Fire Rings

Are you just fanning the flames? Or are you up to speed on the risks from the fire rings?

Welcome to Part II where I offer advice to my neighbors in Huntington Beach who wish to keep their beloved fire rings, even though I’m an advocate for their immediate removal.

As you remember, the Newport Beach City Council voted unanimously to remove 60 fire rings here. Meanwhile HB, including Bolsa Chica, is polluting the region with its 465 fire rings. If they are to prevail and keep their bonfires they have some work to do to focus their arguments.

For starters HB should understand our arguments:

Find out what's happening in Newport Beach-Corona Del Marwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

  • The smoke is bad for public health. This is based on scientific evidence; you should read some of it. According to the EPA,

    Smoke may smell good, but it’s not good for you.

    This issue really touches a nerve with the decision makers.

Find out what's happening in Newport Beach-Corona Del Marwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

  • There’s no low-threshold exposure; according to Mark Z. Jacobson, Director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University:

    One rule of thumb based on epidemiological data is that there is no low threshold level to the health effects (including mortality) of small air pollution particles (generally referred to as PM2.5)

    Ask yourself, what does this mean for those living near the fire rings for more than a year or two?

  • The Coastal Commission calls the fire rings a “low-cost amenity”, but there’s a fallacy here. The long-term cost is borne by the nearby residents in the form of cancer, lost wages due to illness, and death.
  • The case for keeping the fire rings is unethical. How can you weigh your night of fun against our health arguments?
  • “Premature death.” You’ve heard the AQMD use the phrase, and so do we. You heard them say,

    We lose 5 to 6,000 people a year from premature death due to particulate matter.

    I don’t know how you offset that against lost revenue of bundled wood.

  • If the AQMD bans the fire rings, no one loses their job and there’s no cost. The AQMD has seldom seen such a compelling case. All they have to do is deal with public opinion.
  • Enforcement won’t work. You can’t expect a lifeguard to patrol the fire rings. And at the end of the evening, people throw all their plastic into the fire; basically everything they don’t want to take home goes up in toxic smoke.
  • The local residents are suffering “involuntary exposure”. Yeah, the fire rings are a blast for you. Maybe you enjoy the rings 2 or 3 times a year, but for us nearby, we’re suffering 300+ nights per year. The American Lung Association agrees,
    No one should be placed in harm’s way involuntarily.
  • Propane or natural gas? If I were you, I’d harmonize with the AQMD proposals. You risk losing all your fire rings; it’s a bad bet. Let the AQMD fiddle with clean alternatives. Of course, we’ll be asking for an immediate injunction while we work out the details (for public health reasons).
  • Witness to History. We’re shooting for the stars; we’re on the verge of shutting down 836 fire rings. This could be a grand-slam for public health. How do you compete with that?
  • Ok, had enough? My wife has; she's telling me, "No more riling up the fire rings people!" So tomorrow I've got to wrap this up...

    What do you think about the fire rings in Newport Beach? Tell us in the comments.

    We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

    The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?