8 ms·
Leave no trace: Finland removes litter bins from national parks
- smileysteve 3y agoNot having litter bins seems successful in Japan; and perhaps Finland's social contract is similarly collective. From a US UX perspective though; I've been taught, if you don't want people to litter, then make bins readily available, emptied often.
- ugjka 3y agoSo the contract in the US is "I will litter, just to spite not having litter bins"
- roughly 3y agoNo, the contract is “I will do the right thing, presuming it does not require more than the smallest bit of personal sacrifice of any kind.” This generalizes to most facets of American life.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rayiner 3y agoIt doesn’t even go that far. If you go somewhere like New York, you’ll see Americans littering within sight of a trash can.
- qup 3y agoThis was a major plot point to my trip to SF. My nephew, from the Midwest, could not believe someone would throw trash on the ground within close proximity to a trash can. He found out he was wrong after bringing it to their attention.
- NikkiA 3y agoI've seen people throw litter on the ground next to a bin, here in the UK, with the mindset apparently being 'someone will have to pickup the shit that falls out of the bin when it's emptied anyway, so...'
- toomanyrichies 3y agoI'd go even further, and add "...presuming you don't frame 'the right thing' in a way that I perceive as being lectured to. If you indeed do this, I will respond by going out of my way to do the wrong thing, just to spite you." See "rolling coal" as an example. [1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal
- LastWeekendWas 3y ago[dead]
- LazyMans 3y ago15 steps to the shopping cart return is a massive sacrifice many are not willing to make. Hah!
- jstarfish 3y agoI try to keep decency alive by always grabbing a stray cart to return with my own.
- extraduder_ire 3y agoHere, most trollies take a 50c-€2 coin to unlock so this rarely happens. I usually use a US quarter instead of a €2 though.
- LazyMans 3y agoWe have a chain of stores here, Alidi and Lidl, that require a US quarter to get a cart. Surprisingly effective, and also funny that walking your cart all the way back to the store is worth the 25 cents, but walking 15 steps to a cart return is too much of a burden.
- extraduder_ire 3y agoWe also have aldi/lidl here. I think the lidl mechanism is identical in the US though, since the quarter works in it. (try a €2 some time, if you have one) Really you only have to walk to any other cart to get your coin back, and I think it being a loss aversion thing makes it feel like more than just paying 25 cents. Also, anyone parking up is likely to grab abandoned carts with the coin in them for their own shopping.
- smileysteve 3y agoUnless they get $0.25 back, then they'll even walk it back to the store!
- wrp 3y agoSome random bits about Japan: Litter bins were removed from public spaces after the 1995 sarin attacks. Litter has actually been a notorious problem in natural preserves. There was an account of hiking up Mount Fuji by some famous travel writer, who went on about the great deal of rubbish strewn all the way up. Litter is less common in urban areas because there is less opportunity for it. When you see litter, what does it consist of? It's mostly the remains of food packaging. Japanese rarely eat away from designated eating areas. You don't see people snacking while walking down the street.
- pstuart 3y agoBurning Man also does this effectively, but that's a self-selected crowd and teams of helpers...
- hedora 3y agoWhat’s the goal? People transport garbage somewhere else, and put it in a bin that goes to the same place? Also, the article says they sell people individual use plastic trash bags, and those are very popular. So, in addition to being inconvenient, they are adding plastic trash to the waste people produce. This sounds suspiciously like the “environmental win” California got by getting rid of all most all its school busses, reducing the school districts’ direct emissions, but increasing their indirect emissions by at least 10x. Why doesn’t Finland just increase park funding enough to clean the bathrooms and empty the trash? The bathroom win in the article can’t be more than a 50% reduction of cleaning imbalance.
- xinayder 3y agoSomeone should inform Ron Swanson and Leslie Knope that their park is not getting any money
- LazyMans 3y agoFrom personal experience, when the expectation is that you pack it in, and pack it out. You bring less, waste less, and more consciously collect your litter. For likely a number of reasons not explored in depth in the article, it reduced the amount of trash laying around on trails. Not sure people are purposely throwing trash on the ground. It's more likely people are bringing less and taking better care to store away their trash instead of leaving it loose in a pocket to fall out later. Not having to maintain bins in nature areas is a big win for many conservation reasons. This move is a general win the eyes of conservation (reduce and reuse). The article also didn't go into detail about the specific bathroom changes. They may have changed to a different type of toilet. Again, conservation being the goal. Spending more money is a solution, but better efficiency is likely a better one.
- jdechko 3y agoToo many people here (in the US) are just assholes when it comes to this sort of thing. Leave no trace doesn’t apply to them, their trash, their “neat” rock cairns, or their pet’s droppings.
- Eumenes 3y agoThey tried this in NYC subway platforms and assholes just threw their trash on the ground.
- tartuffe78 3y agoIt's a good thing Finland isn't full of New Yorkers!
- LatteLazy 3y agoI'm confused by the repeated use of the phrase "litter-free hiking". Is this a common phrase in Finnish? If it means "don't produce any litter", as in only take biodegradable things with you, then that sort of makes sense. If it means make litter but you just have to carry it around that's another matter...
- maxerickson 3y agoIn my usage, 'litter' is trash that has been improperly disposed of. If you bag and carry it, that isn't the case.
- jmalicki 3y agoIn the US, leave no trace means pack out everything... Including even used toilet paper. For wilderness areas biodegradable isn't enough to avoid causing damage to the ecosystem, creating wildlife used to feeding off humans, etc.
- LatteLazy 3y agoSo your wouldn't even just bury (zero plastic, biodegradable) toilet paper? Visiting some US national parks is high on my bucket list so I should know this... thanks!
- cafebee 3y agoIn practice, backcountry hikers in the US do commonly bury toilet paper. There’s definitely a growing contingent arguing they shouldn’t, though. Portable bidets (like the culoclean brand) and pee cloths (like the kula brand) can reduce toilet paper use and make packing it out easier.
- dehrmann 3y ago> ...transitioning from traditional outdoor restrooms to ones that are more cost-effective... Sounds like they're doing it to save money, framing it in a pseudo environmental light to distract from that, and depending on Finns' sense of social responsibility for it to go well.
- Wowfunhappy 3y agoI don't understand the purpose of this at all. I wholeheartedly acknowledge the following: • People shouldn't litter. They shouldn't litter anywhere, but especially while hiking. • A lack of trash cans is not an excuse to drop litter on the ground. Carry your trash with you until you find a trash can, wherever that is. However—why get rid of trash cans? They're a very nice convenience, especially in logical places like rest areas. Visitors who use them are able to carry a lighter load for the remainder of their journey. They mention the rest areas have bathrooms. Are there really no trash cans there either? I guess women with tampons have to carry those out of the park? I don't see how that helps anyone.
- voakbasda 3y agoThe last few times I went to a state/national park, the trash cans were overflowing. There was trash piling up around them, getting blown off into the distance. If they are not going to be serviced on a regular basis to prevent this outcome, then I think they are absolutely doing the right thing by removing them entirely.
- RetroTechie 3y agoIt's mostly a cost saving measure. For each bin out there, you need someone + vehicle to empty it regularly. Which costs money (also deposing the trash collected). In some situations, bins may be 'adopted' by individuals or (commercial?) organisations active in the area. But there's few situations where that works. Put bin & not empty often enough, and it'll just serve as a trash magnet, spreading lightweight plastic everywhere. No bins simply scales better. More visitors = more people taking litter as well as their own trash out. But this relies on mentality. In general, I think people have become more appreciative of nature that still is. And more willing to keep places clean. But there's always those who don't care. In my country, what surprises/annoys me most about litter, is how near the closest bin it often is. How hard is it, to toss beer can in bin 20m down the path? So, in these areas in Finland, take-your-own works. In many other locales, it would not & just lead to more litter. Good show for the nature-loving Fins, btw. :-)