Fires around Sydney

[MicCanberra]

2 hours ago, Janet987 said:

"the areas where the fires have been burning are not prime areas for overseas tourists."  
 

Our upcoming cruise included a stop in Eden. Cruise ships are now bypassing the port, a photo of the beach after the fires: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-01-07/eden-far-from-a-paradise-as-australia-bushfires-hit-economy

 

Kangaroo Island is not a prime tourist area? 

Yes, both KI and Eden are tourist stops but most cruises and in fact most tourists do not go to either.

[possum52]

2 hours ago, Aus Traveller said:

Sorry to say, but I don't think that the US State Department is the most authoritative source on the dangers of the Australian bush fires. The fact that they have issued travel warnings proves this.

 

The vast majority of Australia is not directly affected by fires and the areas where the fires have been burning are not prime areas for overseas tourists. For instance, the holidaymakers evacuated from Mallacoota would have been from other areas in Victoria, probably mainly Melbourne. I doubt that overseas tourists ever go to Mallacoota, lovely as it is.

I agree with you Aus Traveller that the US State Dept would not know better than our own Governments who have contacted  US authorities about the travel advisory as they are not happy about it. I heard the QLD Premier in a press conference yeaterday say she had written to Mr Trump and the PM just now in a press conference stated he had contacted high up officials in the US State Dept.

 

QLD, I think I'm correct in saying has no ongoing fires that are causing problems to communities.  NSW has numerous fires still burning but the majority are under control or being controlled - I just looked at the Fires Near Me website - and the ones out of control are mainly in the Mt Kosciuszko National Park and across to near Eden. Victoria does have out of control fires but in areas not neccessarily where tourists would be going unless they are hiking. Aus Traveller, you mentioned Mallacoota, actually there were German tourists there when the fires came through on NYE, they were evacuated along with other holiday makers and residents.

 

Kangaroo Island has the most going fires in South Australia and that is of major concern. Western Australia has one serious fire which has a watch and act warning and Tasmania has two fires at advice warning.

 

It was said on TV news that the NSW RFS has announced that the Shoalhaven Shire and the South Coast are now open to tourists so that is good news.

 

Leigh

 

[Aus Traveller]

There were bushfires in Queensland from September on, but I think they were pretty-well extinguished by Christmas.

[Docker123]

For cruise travellers, the fires will probably reflect inconvenience (cancelled ports) rather than danger.

 

Those who have an added land component will have to continuing monitoring the news and emergency websites daily in case travel plans need to be changed even at the last minute.

 

Given some reasonable winds and some rain, the smoke impact on cities should dissipate. 
 

The fires will burn in more isolated areas until there is substantial rain. However, the threat level reduces as much of the undergrowth is burnt out.

 

Bottom line, come and enjoy your vacations. Pay attention to the news, but do not make this your priority.

 

[MMDown Under]

Just follow bush fire alerts issued by the various state governments - NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, are the most recent.  Then use common sense whether you would be comfortable visiting the places which have current/recent bush fire/smoke warnings.  

 

From personal experience, I think Governments are too keen to encourage tourism, after natural disasters.  Tourists just get in the way.  We visited all Hawaiian islands on a holiday once and one island was wiped out (Kauia ?).  We were advised to still visit, despite the damage.  We just added a day to each of the other islands and visited another time.

 

When Kangaroo Island was wiped out 1/3 rd by bush fires, tourism was being encouraged.  Later this fire damaged over a half of the island, and threatened the main town, where people sheltered on the beach, close to the water.  I love this island, but now is not the time to visit. 

 

If your Government states "Do not travel", you will be entitled to a full refund through your insurance.  

[in rod we trust]

was up the hunter valley wineries  misses when to see Elton john ,  I went fishing lol but it was so good to breathe in some fresh air after the month + of breathing in bushfire smoke ..  even driving back you can smell the smoke and see just how much smoke and haze is covering Sydney basin 

 

[Aus Traveller]

3 minutes ago, MMDown Under said:

Just follow bush fire alerts issued by the various state governments - NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, are the most recent.  Then use common sense whether you would be comfortable visiting the places which have current/recent bush fire/smoke warnings.  

 

From personal experience, I think Governments are too keen to encourage tourism, after natural disasters.  Tourists just get in the way.  We visited all Hawaiian islands on a holiday once and one island was wiped out (Kauia ?).  We were advised to still visit, despite the damage.  We just added a day to each of the other islands and visited another time.

 

When Kangaroo Island was wiped out 1/3 rd by bush fires, tourism was being encouraged.  Later this fire damaged over a half of the island, and threatened the main town, where people sheltered on the beach, close to the water.  I love this island, but now is not the time to visit. 

 

If your Government states "Do not travel", you will be entitled to a full refund through your insurance.  

I appreciate the points you are making, but what if the government urges caution while travelling, rather than "Do not travel"?

 

If every overseas person who has booked to come to Australia in the next several months, this will seriously reduce the country's tourist income. I think it is over-reacting when, in this case, the natural disaster is directly affecting areas that the tourists will not be visiting.

 

Our American friends who have asked whether they should continue with their travels are flying to Australia to go on a cruise. One person is then cruising to NZ. Someone else plans to travel in Australia after their cruise, i.e. in six weeks' time. Others probably plan a few days sightseeing around Sydney. I don't think the fires will impact on their travel plans, and to have them cancel reduces the income coming into Australia and also New Zealand.

[in rod we trust]

I wouldn't recommend anybody to travel to Sydney if they have any sort of breathing problems .. if its just to get on a cruise ship well that's ok.     but as for sight seeing around Sydney etc  no way if they have breathing problems of any sort.. its been the worse here I have ever seen in Sydney over my life time .. smoke is starting to get to the throat and gives you a bloody headache 

Edited January 12, 2020 by in rod we trust

[MMDown Under]

2 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I appreciate the points you are making, but what if the government urges caution while travelling, rather than "Do not travel"?

 

If every overseas person who has booked to come to Australia in the next several months, this will seriously reduce the country's tourist income. I think it is over-reacting when, in this case, the natural disaster is directly affecting areas that the tourists will not be visiting.

 

Our American friends who have asked whether they should continue with their travels are flying to Australia to go on a cruise. One person is then cruising to NZ. Someone else plans to travel in Australia after their cruise, i.e. in six weeks' time. Others probably plan a few days sightseeing around Sydney. I don't think the fires will impact on their travel plans, and to have them cancel reduces the income coming into Australia and also New Zealand.

If the Government urges caution whilst travelling rather than "do not travel", it is up to the passenger to decide what they are comfortable doing.  I would rather a visitor make a decision which suits them, than makes a decision based on Australia's future tourism income.  I just had a friend from the US escape from Canberra's bush fire smoke and holidayed in Port Douglas, Queensland in lieu.  A smart decision, under the circumstances.  

[BRANDEE]

2 hours ago, Docker123 said:

For cruise travellers, the fires will probably reflect inconvenience (cancelled ports) rather than danger.

 

Those who have an added land component will have to continuing monitoring the news and emergency websites daily in case travel plans need to be changed even at the last minute.

 

Given some reasonable winds and some rain, the smoke impact on cities should dissipate. 
 

The fires will burn in more isolated areas until there is substantial rain. However, the threat level reduces as much of the undergrowth is burnt out.

 

Bottom line, come and enjoy your vacations. Pay attention to the news, but do not make this your priority.

 

 

Can't wait to visit your beautiful country in a few weeks...prayers and good thoughts for your fire fighters and citizens!

[lyndarra]

This afternoon I decided to wash my van, something I hadn't done in a long time. Just as I finished I had to come inside. It had started raining. Perhaps I should wash it more often. 😀

[Shayna1900]

1 hour ago, Aus Traveller said:

I appreciate the points you are making, but what if the government urges caution while travelling, rather than "Do not travel"?

 

If every overseas person who has booked to come to Australia in the next several months, this will seriously reduce the country's tourist income. I think it is over-reacting when, in this case, the natural disaster is directly affecting areas that the tourists will not be visiting.

 

Our American friends who have asked whether they should continue with their travels are flying to Australia to go on a cruise. One person is then cruising to NZ. Someone else plans to travel in Australia after their cruise, i.e. in six weeks' time. Others probably plan a few days sightseeing around Sydney. I don't think the fires will impact on their travel plans, and to have them cancel reduces the income coming into Australia and also New Zealand.

Your Canadian friend 😉 is still coming, and looking forward to it ( we’ll maybe a bit worried) Canada also posted a cautionary travel advisory, but not high enough that  cancellation insurance would cover cancelling all or part of the trip. I don’t think that level of advisory will make many cancel their plans. But those who have not already booked might change their minds about traveling to Australia at this time.

 I’ll try to make adjustments based on the situation but I’ve prebooked most planes, Accommodations and excursions. So it will be out of pocket. I mean to spend some of my tourist’s  dollars for the next few weeks in Australia and New Zealand.
It’s strange the advisory is for a whole country. Why can’t they advise you to stay out of the area between Sydney and Melborne and tell you to enjoy yourself elsewhere in the country. Or allow you to rebook an internal flight away from a dangerous bushfire area to another part of the country.

[OzKiwiJJ]

1 hour ago, lyndarra said:

This afternoon I decided to wash my van, something I hadn't done in a long time. Just as I finished I had to come inside. It had started raining. Perhaps I should wash it more often. 😀

Wash it every day please. 🤣

[possum52]

1 hour ago, Shayna1900 said:

Your Canadian friend 😉 is still coming, and looking forward to it ( we’ll maybe a bit worried) Canada also posted a cautionary travel advisory, but not high enough that  cancellation insurance would cover cancelling all or part of the trip. I don’t think that level of advisory will make many cancel their plans. But those who have not already booked might change their minds about traveling to Australia at this time.

 I’ll try to make adjustments based on the situation but I’ve prebooked most planes, Accommodations and excursions. So it will be out of pocket. I mean to spend some of my tourist’s  dollars for the next few weeks in Australia and New Zealand.
It’s strange the advisory is for a whole country. Why can’t they advise you to stay out of the area between Sydney and Melborne and tell you to enjoy yourself elsewhere in the country. Or allow you to rebook an internal flight away from a dangerous bushfire area to another part of the country.

I agree with you Shayna, I just read the Canadian Govt travel advisory for Australia. Under risk levels it just says to take nornal security precautions and in areas affected by bushfires to exercise a high level of caution which makes sense. But then in the section Natural Disasters and Climate - there is a quite a few paragraphs referring to the bushfires. I believe it is exaggerated talking about the catastrophic alert level in some areas and the essential services which could be affected. Sure these things could happen and a catastrophic fire warning is for fire danger in a particular area on any given day, not every day and perhaps not every area. It is a term also not used in every state, although most I think.

 

To me, important things for visitors and tourists are to take notice of all fire warnings which will be broadcast widely and be aware of their surroundings. If you are in areas where the air quality is poor or worse, and particularly if you have breathing difficulties due to illness or disease ensure you take appropriate steps to stay out of it.

 

Enjoy your stay here.

 

Leigh

Edited January 12, 2020 by possum52

[Shayna1900]

5 hours ago, possum52 said:

I agree with you Shayna, I just read the Canadian Govt travel advisory for Australia. Under risk levels it just says to take nornal security precautions and in areas affected by bushfires to exercise a high level of caution which makes sense. But then in the section Natural Disasters and Climate - there is a quite a few paragraphs referring to the bushfires. I believe it is exaggerated talking about the catastrophic alert level in some areas and the essential services which could be affected. Sure these things could happen and a catastrophic fire warning is for fire danger in a particular area on any given day, not every day and perhaps not every area. It is a term also not used in every state, although most I think.

 

To me, important things for visitors and tourists are to take notice of all fire warnings which will be broadcast widely and be aware of their surroundings. If you are in areas where the air quality is poor or worse, and particularly if you have breathing difficulties due to illness or disease ensure you take appropriate steps to stay out of it.

 

Enjoy your stay here.

 

Leigh

Yes they have those warnings but the warning level is not high enough for travel cancelation /interruption insurance to kick in. I have to check if it effects my medical travel insurance. I’ve bought masks just in case because I’m recovering from bronchitis .

[The_Big_M]

16 hours ago, Stickman1990 said:

What is that supposed to mean?

 

The politicising (either side) of these fires is becoming very tiresome 

 

It's a response to the previous post saying the government was unhappy with the travel advisories being issued.

[lucymorgan]

As well as the fires near me app, visitors might like to check out the air rater app.  Here is the current situation for Canberra (where I live) and Circular Quay in Sydney (where I am going to board a cruise in two weeks partly to escape the smoke 🙂).   You can add locations to monitor (perhaps the ports you are visiting)

 

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=au.gov.nsw.rfs.firesnearme.national&hl=en_AU

https://apps.apple.com/au/app/fires-near-me-australia/id406270824

 

https://airrater.org/

Edited January 12, 2020 by lucymorgan

[The_Big_M]

 

 

6 hours ago, possum52 said:

I believe it is exaggerated talking about the catastrophic alert level in some areas and the essential services which could be affected. Sure these things could happen and a catastrophic fire warning is for fire danger in a particular area on any given day, not every day and perhaps not every area. It is a term also not used in every state, although most I think.

 

 

It's not just a case of "could" happen. We've just had people, including many tourists, evacuated by navy ship due to being trapped by bushfires on a beach. That's pretty serious and worth travellers being aware of. The point of this is that travellers _do_ check out the fire advisories instead of just thinking yeah, no big deal, fire brigade can put things out and nobody is at risk. 20+ people killed so far...

[Shayna1900]

27 minutes ago, The_Big_M said:

 

 

 

It's not just a case of "could" happen. We've just had people, including many tourists, evacuated by navy ship due to being trapped by bushfires on a beach. That's pretty serious and worth travellers being aware of. The point of this is that travellers _do_ check out the fire advisories instead of just thinking yeah, no big deal, fire brigade can put things out and nobody is at risk. 20+ people killed so far...

I feel petty talking about travelers  points of view when so many have lost so much. But if there is a low level warning for all of Australia there is no chance of people recovering money traveling to areas that are truly effective and using it to relocate to another area in Australia. But if they targeted certain areas as higher risk, then travelers could use the trip interrupted clause to make alternate decisions. I think this would make visitors more at ease to travel to Australia .

[Shayna1900]

On 12/28/2017 at 6:46 PM, DarkJedi said:

I don't know that there is a best line, but I can tell you that mainland masses are going to generally be better than island hopping. I made a scheduled trip to what is considered the best garden in the Carib for DW one trip, while it was OK, she didn't really feel that there was anything to it. We were done with her entire walking tour in about an hour. For comparison she can take 4-5 hours to enjoy Morikami in S FL, and we have been there dozens of times.

 

55 minutes ago, lucymorgan said:

As well as the fires near me app, visitors might like to check out the air rater app.  Here is the current situation for Canberra (where I live) and Circular Quay in Sydney (where I am going to board a cruise in two weeks partly to escape the smoke 🙂).   You can add locations to monitor (perhaps the ports you are visiting)

 

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=au.gov.nsw.rfs.firesnearme.national&hl=en_AU

https://apps.apple.com/au/app/fires-near-me-australia/id406270824

 

https://airrater.org/

Thank you. Where are you going on your cruise?

Edited January 12, 2020 by Shayna1900

[Stickman1990]

4 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

20+ people killed so far...

Absolutely not intending to take anything away from the tragedy of these deaths but I don’t believe that any of them were tourists

[Janet987]

Possum52 recommended Tourism Australia https://www.australia.com/en-us/travel-alerts.html for accurate Travel Alerts. At that site, Sydney has either had Very Poor or Hazardous AirQuality ratings all today by DPIE readings.  The Blue Mountains (apparently another place overseas tourists don't go) continues to have harzardous air quality and the Park is closed due Fire Alerts. 

[MicCanberra]

These readings change hourly depending on the direction the wind is blowing or not blowing at all.

[MCOgirl]

16 hours ago, MMDown Under said:

If the Government urges caution whilst travelling rather than "do not travel", it is up to the passenger to decide what they are comfortable doing.  I would rather a visitor make a decision which suits them, than makes a decision based on Australia's future tourism income.  I just had a friend from the US escape from Canberra's bush fire smoke and holidayed in Port Douglas, Queensland in lieu.  A smart decision, under the circumstances.  

Well said - I completely agree it is a personable decision. My biggest concern is our health due to the high levels of Air Pollution - not what will happen to the tourism . There is no comparison IMO.

Tourism will bounce back if  it is adversely affected.This would be short term situation .

[lyndarra]

15 hours ago, lyndarra said:

This afternoon I decided to wash my van, something I hadn't done in a long time. Just as I finished I had to come inside. It had started raining. Perhaps I should wash it more often. 😀

Soon after I came inside the rain stopped. Looks like I'll need to wash the Forester today except Monday is housework day which usually means cleaning up all the ash that's got inside the house in the past week. Vacuuming the pool at the moment is a lost cause.