It's Climate Change I tell'ya!! IT'S CLIMATE CHANGE!!

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,445
11,084
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
How many were caused by arson? Just askin....
Fires in summer , never heard of such a thing .
Such a nasty word. The good people prefer human caused. That way they get lumped in with the accidental ones.
The ones in August? Fafvateen at least.
The goal of the new rules, potentially in place until Oct. 15, is just to encourage Nova Scotians to stay the hell out of the woods, even if they are the owners of those woods. The province laid down an ordinary fire ban weeks ago, but now it has banned hiking, camping and fishing in all provincial and private forests…just in case, except…
Nova Scotia, not content with everyday tools of regulation like campfire or vehicle bans, has almost totally denied its citizens access even to privately owned woodlands…except…
1755817359059.jpeg
except…Since Nova Scotia restricted activity a week ago, the provincial Department of Natural Resources (DNR) issued tickets to six people who violated the ban. Venturing into the woods comes with a fine of $25,000 in Nova Scotia.
“If ‘extremism in defence of public property is no vice’ is to be the new rule in Canada, we are surely going to see a lot of big changes to urban public parks and other land patches, which, for a decade, have been beset by nomadic tent-dwellers who make copious and inveterate use of propane tanks, electrical heaters, camp stoves, improvised wiring from hijacked power supplies, and open fires.”
The CBC has now inquired into the possibility that some members of the Wandering Fire-Bringer class may be testing the Nova Scotia fire ban. Turns out it’s made of vapour. The province’s Department of Opportunities and Social Development estimates that an estimated 137 rough sleepers are still living in the Nova Scotia woods and “cannot be convinced” to leave.

They’ve been visited repeatedly by a team of “outreach workers” who themselves enjoy an exception from the travelling rules. A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Most have stayed put as if they’d grown roots.
Rules for some but not for all has always bothered me, but this is just another example is all I guess…like…
1755821586530.jpeg
1755822170830.jpeg

And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may (?) already have been started at an “encampment.” It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest.

The provision in the provincial fire proclamation that allows for $25,000 penalties is reserved exclusively for those who might conceivably have such a sum to cough up. Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention?

After a fortnight of hearing Nova Scotians insist that the current forest-fire risks are unprecedented, and that the traditional mobility privileges of citizenship must necessarily shrivel into abeyance, I am suddenly assured by a legal-aid lawyer that anyone collared for being unlawfully encamped “would have to be quickly released, as the offence would not warrant being detained.”

This ultra-confident prediction leaves me confused. One struggles to understand, from outside N.S., how forest protection can be so important as to justify a ministerial fiat of extraordinary and unprecedented character — but not so important as to be at all enforced…for all, just for some.

As for the rest of Nova Scotians, "I get that people want to go for a hike or want to go for a walk in the woods with their dog," Houston said during a wildfire update with officials.

"But how would you like to be stuck in the woods while there's a fire burning around you?" He said the restrictions will be loosened once enough rain falls to mitigate the risk.
1755820956898.jpeg
The (now, so far) 12 people above that NS Premiere Houston is hoping will be fully protected and collected upon, probably isn’t from this group:
1755821305172.jpeg
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,810
14,414
113
Low Earth Orbit
The goal of the new rules, potentially in place until Oct. 15, is just to encourage Nova Scotians to stay the hell out of the woods, even if they are the owners of those woods. The province laid down an ordinary fire ban weeks ago, but now it has banned hiking, camping and fishing in all provincial and private forests…just in case, except…
Nova Scotia, not content with everyday tools of regulation like campfire or vehicle bans, has almost totally denied its citizens access even to privately owned woodlands…except…
View attachment 30694
except…Since Nova Scotia restricted activity a week ago, the provincial Department of Natural Resources (DNR) issued tickets to six people who violated the ban. Venturing into the woods comes with a fine of $25,000 in Nova Scotia.
“If ‘extremism in defence of public property is no vice’ is to be the new rule in Canada, we are surely going to see a lot of big changes to urban public parks and other land patches, which, for a decade, have been beset by nomadic tent-dwellers who make copious and inveterate use of propane tanks, electrical heaters, camp stoves, improvised wiring from hijacked power supplies, and open fires.”
The CBC has now inquired into the possibility that some members of the Wandering Fire-Bringer class may be testing the Nova Scotia fire ban. Turns out it’s made of vapour. The province’s Department of Opportunities and Social Development estimates that an estimated 137 rough sleepers are still living in the Nova Scotia woods and “cannot be convinced” to leave.

They’ve been visited repeatedly by a team of “outreach workers” who themselves enjoy an exception from the travelling rules. A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Most have stayed put as if they’d grown roots.
Rules for some but not for all has always bothered me, but this is just another example is all I guess…like…
View attachment 30697
View attachment 30698

And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may (?) already have been started at an “encampment.” It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest.

The provision in the provincial fire proclamation that allows for $25,000 penalties is reserved exclusively for those who might conceivably have such a sum to cough up. Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention?

After a fortnight of hearing Nova Scotians insist that the current forest-fire risks are unprecedented, and that the traditional mobility privileges of citizenship must necessarily shrivel into abeyance, I am suddenly assured by a legal-aid lawyer that anyone collared for being unlawfully encamped “would have to be quickly released, as the offence would not warrant being detained.”

This ultra-confident prediction leaves me confused. One struggles to understand, from outside N.S., how forest protection can be so important as to justify a ministerial fiat of extraordinary and unprecedented character — but not so important as to be at all enforced…for all, just for some.

As for the rest of Nova Scotians, "I get that people want to go for a hike or want to go for a walk in the woods with their dog," Houston said during a wildfire update with officials.

"But how would you like to be stuck in the woods while there's a fire burning around you?" He said the restrictions will be loosened once enough rain falls to mitigate the risk.
View attachment 30695
The (now, so far) 12 people above that NS Premiere Houston is hoping will be fully protected and collected upon, probably isn’t from this group:
View attachment 30696
And my family and friends keep asking....

Why are you leaving Canada?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,445
11,084
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
And my family and friends keep asking....

Why are you leaving Canada?
Tim Houston is telling people to go to the beach (Hurricane Erin) and stay out of the forest (unless you’re homeless, or one of their social workers, and then it’s cool). The selective Enforcement has always irked me. Rules for thee and not for me, etc…
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,445
11,084
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Masks and 6ft too?
Nope. Just $25,000 fines for some, and nothing for others. For those that aren’t in the ‘nothing’ category, Tim Houston is hoping they will get prosecuted to the full extent & collected upon, etc…’cuz…they aren’t part of the chosen that are exempt.

A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Others would just put their marshmallows on the coat hangers, and…

Most have stayed put as if they’d grown roots. And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may already have been started at an “encampment.” It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest. Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention? Nah…that’s for some but not others. Political expediency, etc…
…and arresting homeless people creates bad publicity for politicians because it is widely viewed as inhumane, ineffective, and an attempt to criminalize poverty rather than addressing the root causes of homelessness. Such actions perpetuate negative stereotypes, harm a politician's image, and can lead to public backlash, as they are seen as abandoning compassionate, long-term solutions for the crisis of rough camping homelessness unhousedness.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,810
14,414
113
Low Earth Orbit
Nope. Just $25,000 fines for some, and nothing for others. For those that aren’t in the ‘nothing’ category, Tim Houston is hoping they will get prosecuted to the full extent & collected upon, etc…’cuz…they aren’t part of the chosen that are exempt.

A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Others would just put their marshmallows on the coat hangers, and…

Most have stayed put as if they’d grown roots. And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may already have been started at an “encampment.” It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest. Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention? Nah…that’s for some but not others. Political expediency, etc…
…and arresting homeless people creates bad publicity for politicians because it is widely viewed as inhumane, ineffective, and an attempt to criminalize poverty rather than addressing the root causes of homelessness. Such actions perpetuate negative stereotypes, harm a politician's image, and can lead to public backlash, as they are seen as abandoning compassionate, long-term solutions for the crisis of rough camping homelessness unhousedness.
Put homeless people on rafts on the ocean, anchored of course so tide charts are the curfew but it makes it a Fed Gov't issue and the Ministry of Peches et Ocean Canada.