<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Seeking Solutions for Liscom Slough Dumping – July 8, 2012</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012</link>
	<description>The mildly objectionable weekly newspaper for Arcata, California</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 13:38:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-63894</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-63894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways... there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior...

the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks... but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. ;-)

i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging... but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways&#8230; there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior&#8230;</p>
<p>the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks&#8230; but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. <img src='http://www.arcataeye.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging&#8230; but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67364</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67364</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways... there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior...

the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks... but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. ;-)

i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging... but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways&#8230; there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior&#8230;</p>
<p>the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks&#8230; but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. <img src='http://www.arcataeye.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging&#8230; but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67585</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways... there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior...

the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks... but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. ;-)

i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging... but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes, there would still be some people who would dump anyways&#8230; there is probably nothing we could do to incentivise their behavior&#8230;</p>
<p>the dump must have changed its pricing in the last 3 years. there used to be a minimum 1/2 ton charge, or something like that. and yes, the minimum fee is down to 12 bucks&#8230; but the cost per ton has gone up quadruple to ~146 bucks. used to be 28 and change for 1/2 ton. <img src='http://www.arcataeye.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>i still think that a fee (like that paid when one purchases a tv or a computer) could be extended to all products that have disposable packaging&#8230; but, people hate big govt, at least rhetorically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa Brooks Kraemer</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-63893</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Brooks Kraemer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-63893</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap - like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap &#8211; like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa Brooks Kraemer</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67363</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Brooks Kraemer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap - like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap &#8211; like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa Brooks Kraemer</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67584</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Brooks Kraemer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap - like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good points, though I did hear that dump fees are super cheap &#8211; like $5 maybe. Not sure if that&#039;s true. I kind of think that even it was free people still would be too lazy to drive over to the dump and would just dump it wherever. Some people just aren&#039;t concerned with this sort of thing at all</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-63892</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-63892</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  

the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally... i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.

good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~

it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  </p>
<p>the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally&#8230; i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.</p>
<p>good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~</p>
<p>it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67362</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67362</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  

the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally... i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.

good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~

it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  </p>
<p>the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally&#8230; i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.</p>
<p>good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~</p>
<p>it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Robert Patton</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-67583</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Robert Patton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 02:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-67583</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  

the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally... i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.

good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~

it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tho it seems like we are choosing between waste reduction and illegal dumping. i have never personally seen the dump fees to affect my predilection to purchase things that will be thrown away. those decisions are so distantly related, i doubt anyone does that. if the county added a tax to everything based upon the content that will end up in the dump, problem solved.  </p>
<p>the peeps doing the dumping are avoiding the dump fees by doing it illegally&#8230; i still think the dump fees should be zero. i cannot recall off the top of my head, but there are some counties who are doing this to limit the illegal dumping. maybe low income dump vouchers is an alternative (still a bad idea in my mind)? we are already paying (via individuals and the bay district) to dispose of these illegal dump drop offs. last time i went to the dump, there was a minimum fee, something around 28 bucks. this is not cheap.</p>
<p>good idea abt the cameras, but that just adds to the cost of enforcement. if we do an end run and let peeps dumps for free, we might not need to catch anyone~~~</p>
<p>it is the source of the waste that is creating the landfill. all the plastic that wraps the food people buy. the cheap materials than are used to make furniture that wears out in 5-10 yrs. people are not going to buy less food (nor fewer couches) because the dump fees are high. that makes no sense to me. wonder who thought that up. fantasy world in my mind. i appreciate your thoughts melissa and randy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa Brooks Kraemer</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2012/07/seeking-solutions-for-liscom-slough-dumping-july-8-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-63891</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Brooks Kraemer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 01:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=6326#comment-63891</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think that cheaper dumping fees were discussed but my understanding is that the fees already are pretty cheap. And charging fees for dumping may serve to encourage waste reduction, so in that respect fees may be a good thing.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that cheaper dumping fees were discussed but my understanding is that the fees already are pretty cheap. And charging fees for dumping may serve to encourage waste reduction, so in that respect fees may be a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
