Blogger’s Note: This is the third entry in a series looking at the crime of littering. It is also an update in recognition of Earth Day 2009.

Here’s one way to stop a litterer: pay them.

Or rather, refund them. That’s what Oregon’s done since 1971, using a practice now followed in 12 states. Known as the “bottle bill,” the law bumps up the price of a beverage and hooks the consumer into recycling it by paying them back, in most of the states, a nickel per can or bottle. The policy aimed to not only decrease litter but increases recycling.

Washington, by contrast, was also a 1970s vanguard in a different method of combating its scattered garbage: a litter tax on about a dozen industries that generates $7 million a year for public awareness programs and clean up efforts, according to The Tax Foundation.

Which method was more effective? Judging by the sheer amount of cans and bottles I picked up along Bremerton’s Wheaton Way — believed to account for 40 to 60 percent of litter — Oregon has a leg up on at least that brand of unsightly rubbish. A downside of the litter tax, points out The Tax Foundation’s Andrew Chamberlain, is that businesses simply pass on the tax to push up prices. “That means it will tax every consumer regardless of whether they litter, penalizing a large majority for the behavior of a tiny minority of litterers,” he wrote.

Oregon’s bottle bill, too, does increase costs. But such a policy creates economic incentive to recycle — not just bureaucracy, PR campaigns and state-sponsored cleanups. Oregon even recently added water and flavored water bottles to its list. “It’s about dang time,” an editorial in The News-Review of Roseburg said.

Bottlebill.org says the policy cuts down on litter anywhere between 34 and 64 percent.

Continue reading →

Share on Facebook

Poulsbo Cop Nick Hoke watched from his patrol car last month as a motorist tossed a bag of six used whipped cream cans onto the side of the road. When Hoke stopped the man, and asked how often he littered, the man’s reply was quick and simple.

“Almost never,” the man said.

Those of you who follow this blog know we recently took a look at the secret lives of litterers in an informal investigation. We found out who some of these litterers are, why they do it, and one way we can stop them from trashing up this place called Kitsap.

Next up in the discussion: how has law enforcement dealt with litterers?

Port Orchard Detective Marvin McKinney says a pet peeve of his on patrol are those who litter the roads with cigarette butts. I think it’s probably something many of us have in common with him. McKinney had a rather creative way of dealing with a butt litterer one time.

Continue reading →

Share on Facebook

Littering, unquestionably, is a horrible thing. It creates habitats for disease infested insects and rodents; it harms wildlife; and most notably (and selfishly) for us humans, it creates an eyesore and dilapidates our communities. It’s also illegal, by penalty of fine or even jail.

Yet against our laws and outrage, why are our streets covered in — to put it bluntly — discarded crap? And who are these litterers, and why do they do it?

On Sunday, I decided to find out. But it’s hard to catch a litterer in the act to ask them. (That’s our first clue in this little investigation: litterers are secretive about their trashy ways.)

So to peer inside a litterer, I looked to the litter itself. In two bags worth of junk I collected on Wheaton Way in Bremerton, here’s some VERY informal observations:

* Litterers have protected sex. There were numerous condoms and their wrappers strewn around. (Good thing I wore gloves.)

Continue reading →

Share on Facebook