Posted on 10/17/2006 2:13:04 PM PDT by kiriath_jearim
Magistrates have fined a man £200 after finding him guilty of putting paper in a recycling sack for bottles and cans only - breaking council rules.
Michael Reeves, 28, a journalist from Swansea, had denied putting an item of junk mail in the bag.
[Michael Reeves said the decision to prosecute him was "crazy"]
The court was told the letter, which was addressed to him, "contaminated" the other items put out for recycling.
After the hearing Mr Reeves said he had since stopped recycling and feared his case would discourage others.
Magistrates in the city were told under the Environmental Protection Act, councils could impose strict rules on their refuse collection services.
Mr Reeves was served with a warning notice in April this year when he put his bins out a day early because he was going on holiday.
Then in June a green recycling bag was found outside his ground floor flat in the Mount Pleasant area of the city containing both paper and bottles and cans.
Swansea Council enforcement officer Martin Lemon said: "There is a recycling scheme available in which paper can put into a green recycling sack and glass bottles and tins can be put into a separate sack."
He said if the items were mixed in the same bag then it would be sent to landfill instead as the council's recycling collection team refused to pick it up.
"The fly-tipping team have responsibility for collecting waste that has been incorrectly disposed of," he said.
"The teams are trained to search through any offending waste that they have found to look for evidence of its origins.
"My colleague informed me that he had opened a green recycling sack and that he found a piece of junk mail with Mr Reeve's name and address."
The sports writer with the city's Evening Post newspaper denied putting the letter in the bag.
The court heard there were no eye witnesses or camera footage of him doing so.
His solicitor Nicola Smith said there was "an array" of possibilities of how it came to be in the sack.
But magistrates found him guilty and fined him £100 and ordered him to pay £100 costs.
Speaking after Tuesday's hearing he described the case as "crazy".
"I don't believe they proved beyond reasonable doubt that I put the paper in the bag - I did not," he said.
He added: "I have not recycled since I received the summons.
"People are not going to recycle if they end up in court and it costs them £200."
That was a good thread. I whole-heartedly support your position.
A FULL one ton truck cost me $1.50... (early 70's) and "recycling" was done by a bunch of folks hanging around, that that could hardly wait for you to drop it off and scavage "treasures". Some would even give you a hand to off load it! 90% of the time I would grab some thrown off "treasure" myself from somebody's pile!
I suppose the buck and a half was to pay the old guy that ran the D8 over the stuff that nobody wanted...
What kind do you have, how many BTUs, what do you genereally burn?
Despite protests from Virginia state officials, residents in communities that host landfills want New York City trash because they receive revenue from it. Virginia's seven regional landfills employ hundreds of residents, paying out millions in annual wages and bringing in more than $500 million annually to the state. Landfill fees enabled Charles City County to build a courthouse and a school, while cutting property taxes by about a third.Forced Recycling is a waste
Mandatory Recycling Wastes Resources, Harms Environment
Recycling: Your Time Can Be Better Spent!
In the past three years, the number of municipal recycling programs has grown from 600 to more than 6,000, and at least 40 states have passed laws to promote recycling. Recycling is being pushed because of two beliefs, both of which are highly debatable: that the nation is running out of landfill space and that recycling of household waste makes inherent economic and environmental sense. Almost universally, however, these programs are failures:Recycling is a waste I used to recycle, until I read a thread here on Free Republic that debunked the myth of recycling. I dont' recycle anything anymore except used motor oil and oil filters, and batteries. That isn't actually recycling, its ensuring proper disposal of hazardous waste.
The bottom line is that the whole thing is nothing but enviro-weenie feel-good propaganda ploy. Do a Google of "recycling is a waste of resources" and you get a lot of hits to recycling resources and evironmental services (both private and municipal), and your results will be awash in teacher=student educational theme pages. But the economics of the whole issue are virtually non-existant.
Without doubt our right-minded senators from the State of Michigan have managed to rid us of that pesky garbage from Canada (and associated financial windfall) in one fell swoop. $500 million generated annually from landfill revenues? Who needs that? Michigan receives over $2 billion in Single Business Tax (SBT) income (and there's absolutely no concievable alternative to that for sure), whereby a bankrupt business pays tax on revenue and not on profit. Gee, with government leaders such as those, no wonder Michigan is the Utopia that it is. A Utopia whereby House For Sale signs are up all over the state, and yet adjecent to them are Re-Elect Granholm for Gov signs. Yep, Utopia alright.
In case you guys run out of space, we have room for 500 YEARs of waste from all over the US.
Then we can try Wyoming, I hear they have about 4 times as much space.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.