This URL is available

If you are an environmentally-friendly organization or company that could make great use of the URL DisposeOfProperly.com, please get in touch with me by sending an email (just click here).

Mike

A day at the Capitol

On the day it is born, a plastic bag is garbage. Aside from the days it will take to ship it from the manufacturer to the retailer where it is distributed, the life expectancy a plastic bag is measured in hours; it will transport goods from the retailer’s store to the consumer’s pantry. And then, it is thrown away. On occasion, the bag will win a reprieve, carrying someone’s sandwich to school, or riding along on some other such errand. Still, the life span of a plastic bag is very short. One might say it is junk the day it is born.

When I spoke at the State Capitol today in support of the Plastic Bag Recycling bill, now known as S.F. No. 267, my testimony was based on the extent to which plastic bags are among the “Floatables” we take out of the river on any given day. Beneath almost every storm sewer spillway, there is an oversized debris field, filled with trash. Within that floating island of trash, there are a variety of fountain cups, beverage and water bottles, Styrofoam bait containers… and plastic bags. You see them floating in the water, laying on the shoreline, and hanging in the trees… having been placed there like ornaments by the wind.

Many plastic bags are disposed of properly. Many are not.

S.F. No. 267 requires the operators of retail chains to play a proactive role in the recycling of the plastic bags they distribute, buy placing collection bins at the entrance or exit of their stores where used plastic bags can be deposited. Why is something so simple such a good idea?

Today, I drew a parallel to discarded tires. When you buy tires in Minnesota, the retailer must offer to take your used tires from you for appropriate disposal, in exchange for a reasonable fee (usually about $5). Sometimes, when people realize the service could add $20 to a set of tires, they opt to dispose of the tires on their own, “through alternate means,” and save the money. Then, because the tires cannot be discarded with their weekly trash or left at a landfill (by law), the tires often find their way into a ditch or waterway. In effect, the rules make it easier to do the wrong thing than it is to do the right thing. Laws should work the other way around.

If the consumer were made aware of a new recycling option for their plastic bags, and then reminded on every visit to the retailer, we would be making it easier to do the right thing.
Further, this is a solution which would be largely funded by the people who profit from introducing plastic bags into our environment in the first place: The manufacturers who make them and the retailers who distribute them.

To put it lightly, not everyone in the room agreed with my position on the matter. There were a couple of gentlemen from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce who did not think it was fair to place a mandate on small businesses; that the act of executing such a program and then keeping records as to their compliance would be too great a burden. They were followed by a representative from the Minnesota Grocers Association, who reiterated that position, and cited a number of volunteer recycling efforts which were making great progress in our state. Opponents of the bill submitted that 4.5 million pounds of plastic bags had been recycled since 2003… and that because of the success of reusable cloth bags, the use of plastic bags had been reduced by 13.3%. But none of these folks were able to offer a baseline; nobody knew how many tons of plastic bags were distributed in Minnesota. So nobody knows what percentage of the material is actually being recycled.

I applaud every effort that any retailer has put forth toward the cause of recycling. Every bag recycled is one less that will float my way in the river, drift in the wind, or litter our roadways, parks and lakes. But a first-hand look at our rivers—not to mention our wetlands, lakes, parks and roadways—indicate that what’s being done now is not enough. It does not take a long time on the river to realize that every ditch, street, and storm sewer is a tributary that carries garbage right into the river. Plastic bags included.

If so many retailers are engaged in recycling efforts already, I would think that S.F. No. 167 would be welcomed with open arms. It would mandate participation by a significantly larger number of chain store retailers in the metro area: Convenience stores, discount stores, specialty retailers, etc. It would make recycling efforts—and consumer awareness—pervasive.

Plastic bags continue to represent a significant share of the “floatables” that we recover during our clean-up efforts. If more of them were captured for recycling, then fewer would end up in our landscapes, lakes, and rivers. This is an issue which can be more economically prevented than solved.

As it stands now, the bill will be held over for future discussion and consideration; hopefully, it will become part of a future omnibus package, and passed. Stay tuned at the Senate web site.

In leiu of closing remarks, I will offer (below) a copy of my most recently updated map of trash targets in the north metro Mississippi River. Each marker represents a oversized debris field or dumped object. I think the map tells us the time has come for more preventative measures.

© 2009 Mike Anderson, Crystal, MN.

View Pre Clean-up Mississippi Targets 7-20-08 in a larger map

The economy or the environment: Yes

There seems to be a lot of debate right now--not all of it civil--with regard to matters of the environment, greenhouse gases, etc. The economy has many people questioning the extent to which we should be spending resources on "green" initiatives when so many companies are bleeding red ink and slashing jobs. Al Gore spoke on Capitol Hill in January, which drew intense criticism from people who are as extreme to the right as they perceive Mr. Gore to be extreme to the left. And here in Minnesota, the convergence of a recently-passed constitutional amendment to fund clean water and the arts has drawn fire of its own, now that the state's budget is written in red.

Frankly, I am frustrated by it all. Neither the economy nor the environment are helped by people on the outer edges of their political persuasion. And both parties offer sound reason with the arguments for their side of the issues. It is neither viewpoint I take issue with; it is when either party offers an ear-less, automated, contentious response to the other. I wish our "leadership" could regain their dignity and manners; and I wish the rest of us would grasp that good morsels exist, even in opposing opinions. Anyone who thinks the other side is absolutely wrong... is absolutely wrong.

You know what would help? If I could just get a few of these politicians and pundits out on a kayak... or to take a walk on a trail along the river. Not with the idea of talking them into funding or anything like that, but just to get them to shut-up for a minute... and listen. To water, to wildlife, to the wind as it whispers through trees... maybe even to each other.

In his "Nature" essay, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote that, "...all natural objects make a kindred expression, when the mind is open to their influence."

Both the economy and the environment need some very serious help right now. If sanity prevails, and truly long-term thought is applied, neither issue will be ignored under the pretense of solving the other.

© 2009 Mike D. Anderson, Crystal, MN.

A response from the Senate

Last week, I received an email from Senator Ann Rest, that indeed she will be introducing a plastic bag recycling bill during the current legislative session. A version of the measure is also on its way to the House. Using the legislative website, we can track the progress of the bill once it has been introduced. When it gets to that point, I'll share links to information here.

Plastic shopping bags are #2 on my “most wanted list,” when it comes to floatable pollution which would be more easily prevented than recovered. (Plastic bottles and fountain cups are #1, and Styrofoam containers are #3.)

Thank you, Senator Rest, and thanks to your colleagues. I hope you’ll let me know if you need photos of spillways which deliver this kind of debris to our waterways.

© 2009 Mike D. Anderson, Crystal, MN.

Letters to the legislature

In the opening statement of his essay on Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau offered the refrain, “That government is best which governs least.” Thoreau—a naturalist in his own right—knew politics should never be the “go to” solution for every issue of the day.

I think Henry and I would have gotten along well. But at the same time, I also believe there is a time and place for the intervention of public policy in the interest of protecting America’s public waters and lands from any actions or ignorance which would damage or destroy them.

It should send a message to us all that the most beautiful places on Earth are those which have either been utterly abandoned by men, or those parts of the planet whose protection has been legislated by leaders and visionaries.

You can bear witness to the work of these visionaries right here, in our area. In a work that defines his legacy, Walter Mondale helped craft the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act… an achievement which protects our beloved St. Croix River Valley, among other waterways. The Wilderness Act of 1964 designated the Boundary Waters Canoe Area as a part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. A special BWCA regulation in 1965 provided the structure for the way the treasure is protected and managed today.

While these areas are treasures that certainly deserve vigilance and care, protection of public lands and waters should not be limited to the most spectacular of our natural resources.
These are the convictions which led me to write two letters last week, addressed to various members of the Minnesota Senate and the House of Representatives. Both letters had to do with measures which were introduced during the last legislative session, but which did not survive to reach full floor debate or passage, as near as I can tell. (Researching progress at the state’s legislative website is not as easy as you might think, and correspondence does not always receive a prompt response, especially when the legislature is between sessions.)

My first letter was directed to Senator Ellen Anderson (and colleagues on the Senate Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources). A measure she introduced last year would have the people who make or distribute plastic shopping bags assume greater responsibility for the recapture and recycling of those bags.

A second letter was sent to Representative Melissa Hortman. She introduced legislation during the last session which would mandate similar behavior from the people who profit from the sale of plastic beverage bottles.

I am neither a statesman or politician. But from my vantage point, the essence of these bills was sound: The people who profit from bringing plastic into our environment should bear a significant share of the burden when it comes to taking them out of our environment. If that means placing conspicuous recycling options at the front of a chain store, so be it. If it means reporting quantities of product introduced into the state so the effectiveness of a recycling campaign can be measured, that seems to me a reasonable expectation.

Having spent hundreds of hours scouring miles of shoreline, we have seen first-hand the extent to which plastic bottles, bags, fountain cups and other plastic tarnishes the rivers of Minnesota and Wisconsin, and beyond. Every piece of debris that is recycled is one that shall not add to rivers overflowing with refuse… so either of these measures begins to solve a problem. Further, the burden of funding from these measures would fall to the people who benefit, financially, from the manufacturing and/or distribution of their respective packaging. Package which, I would argue, was destined to become trash on the day it was born.

You can either scroll down… or click here to see my letter to Senator Anderson (along with her measure on plastic bag recycling), or click here to read my note to Representative Hortman (along with her proposed bottle bill).

© 2009, Mike D. Anderson. All rights reserved.

In support of plastic bag recycling: A letter to the Minnesota Senate

In a letter addressed primarily to Senator Ellen Anderson dated January 14, I expressed support of a measure she had originally introduced in the 2007-2008 legislative session, mandating greater involvement in the recovery and recycling of plastic bags, on the part of the companies who manufacture, or chain stores which distribute the bags. Click here to review what was at one time referred to as SF 2800.

After my initial inquiry to Senator Anderson’s office last fall, an aid let me know that the measure failed to gain traction during the last session. I tried to follow-up on the matter a few weeks ago, but was told only (by the same aid) that the Senator had not yet finalized her legislative agenda. (Senator Anderson has no email address available at the legislative web site… only a web-based form. By now, my hunch is that she reads only the webmail notes which have been passed along by one of her aids. I’ve never heard a response from the Senator herself. So I sent this letter via traditional mail.

In addition to Senator Anderson, I addressed copies of the letter to leadership members of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources, including Senator Satveer S. Chaudhary (Chair), Senator Dan Skogen (Vice Chair), and Senator Pat Pariseau (Ranking Minority Member). I also copied Senator Ann Rest, who represents the district in which Julie and I reside.

Click here to read my letter to Senator Anderson. [Note: To protect recipients from spamming, I removed the email addresses from the copy of the correspondence that is shared at the above links.]

© 2009, Mike D. Anderson. All rights reserved.

In support of a bottle bill: A letter to the Minnesota House

In a letter addressed primarily to Representative Melissa Hortman, I expressed support of a measure she introduced in the 2007-2008 legislative session, which would essentially require the wholesalers of products sold in plastic bottles to account for the number of pounds of plastic distributed each year (less the weight of product contents), and have a plan to gather plastic from the public to be recycled. The measure would set certain recycling expectations of each company, equivalent to a fixed percentage of the number of pounds they had sold or distributed the prior year. Click here to review what was at one time referred to as HR 4046.

My initial emails to Representative Hortman were sent last fall. I tried again with the commencement of the 2009 session in January. In her email response, she indicated that she was basically "floating the idea" when her bill was introduced last year, in the hopes of having it discovered by citizens like myself, thus allowing her to determine the extent of public support for the measure. She has mine.

In fact, in addition to the control of plastic bottles, I suggested that legislation might include the plastic cups that are distributed in the service of fountain drinks and beverages distributed at fast food restaurants, coffee shops, gas stations and convenience stores.

To read my letter to the House, just click here.

In addition to Representative Hortman, I sent copies the letter to congressional colleagues I understood to be co-authors of the bill, including: Representative Erin Murphy, Representative Mindy Greiling, Representative Linda Slocum, and Representative Tina Liebling. Further, I shared the letter with members of the Environmental Policy & Oversight Committee: Representative Kent Eken (Chair), Representative Paul Gardner (Vice Chair), Representative Denny McNamara (Lead GOP). And finally, I sent a copy of the letter to Lyndon Carlson, the Representative from the district where Julie and I reside.

[Note: To protect recipients from spamming, I have removed email addresses from this copy of the correspondence.]

© 2009, Mike D. Anderson. All rights reserved.