Littering 2

I started this off as a comment on the WFA in response to Keep Vague Paranoia Tidy but it became a bit too long so rather then inflict it on Tav...

I was sitting behind a bus with the advert 'Bin don't Sin' telling me I should bin my gum lest I face an £80 fine. Of course I never drop gum; I reserve that honour for cans, fast-food wrappers etc.. I can understand the attempt to target specific items, but it runs the risk of disconnecting the £80 fine with littering in general.

Having heard/read something about bins from the the National Trust I found this:

"There are no litter bins in the valley as it has been proved in the past that they cause more litter from overflowing [...] people would add to overflowing bins or even bring their rubbish to empty out here [...] There is an assumption that responsible visitors will take home their own litter."

Call me daft, but a) why would people travel their to dump small amounts of rubbish and b) if the bins are overflowing at peak times don't you think you should provide more?

They even state that it's an assumption that "responsible visitors" would remove their litter with them. I guess it's also an assumption that such visitors also provide some means in which to store such items, or that the purchase point provided such. To take this in a wider context I find it sad to say that ain't gonna happen.

I've mentioned previously the women and child who elected to cross three lanes of busy traffic rather then walk in the direction they were heading for anyway and either cross one lane then two (which you're not supposed to do, but everyone does) or cross one lane, one lane and then two/two/one using pedestrian crossings.

I'd like measuring to be done on the ratio of people using the crossing in York Street compared to those who just try to cross corner-to-corner, and yes I too am guilty of doing that when there's no traffic I don't stand there when it's busy, I walk up to the crossing.

Okay I'm not trying to turn this into a pedestrians are morons entry I'm trying to connect the same mindset. If people are willing to take the risk of being run over simply to avoid walking a few extra yards and waiting at a crossing you've a snowball's chance that they'll try to hunt down a bin for their rubbish. The important question is "If people can access a bin would they use it?" In other words is this some general malaise whereby people just drop their rubbish because it's easier then walking to the obvious bin, or is it that they can't find a bin (or at least one they can use)?

Back to the National Trust quote "people would add to overflowing bins" okay with a council perspective they have an obligation to keep bins clear, applying a reality check unless they can fit them with remote sensors there's no way to tell if a bin is empty or full. However again it's the mindset I noticed - The bins are provided for my rubbish, if they're full I'll still try to cram in my rubbish because that's what they are there for. The notion that if the bin is full then perhaps you should try to find another or heck even just take your rubbish back with you seems to be absent.

So possible answers: A review of the location and number of bins; ensuring PCSO's etc. hand out fixed penalty notices for littering; and, although some don't like it, the CCTV cameras with speakers to tell people off. It has to be driven home that littering is not the norm and is not acceptable.

Oh yes and as I've already discussed scrapping every plan to charge people by the amount of waste they produce, no-one's going to take litter home if that comes to fruition.