LETTERS 12.11.16


THANKS for printing the article “So you think you can recycle?” (Herald, Recycling Week, November 5, 2016). Actually this is a “promotional feature”, is that a type of ad?
Ryan Collins says we get confused because of the variety of symbols on packs but I would suggest that a much bigger problem is conflicting advice from official sources.
For instance, of the seven recycling nasties which Planet Ark says should go into the garbage two are listed in the Cockburn resource recovery guide as good to go in the recycling bin: glass (ALL types, including window panes) and soft plastics (including cling wrap and plastic bags).
It is all a bit disheartening really…
Bruce Fountain
Ballater Heights, Bibra Lake
The Ed says: Yes, a promotional feature does use advertising copy, but we have to wear the blame for this blooper – we live here and should know the recycling rules. You’re dead right, all glass and plastic (soft or rigid) should be going into your yellow top bins. Perhaps that page should be recycled to the bottom of the cocky’s cage?

Go bigger
MIKE the new guy expresses concerns that recyclable rubbish is only collected fortnightly, whereas general waste is collected weekly (“Dangerous Fake Hippies?” Letters, October 29, 2016).
Good point Mike the new guy, but you can do something about it — contact the council and ask for a larger recycle bin.
The one-off fee is not large but the bin is.
Other than that examine what recyclables fill your bin: cardboard boxes and plastic bags for the shopping, masses of supermarket packaging and newspapers can all be thoughtfully reduced without having to feel guilty because you put some in the general waste bin.
A bigger bin and reducing the collection of recyclable waste in the first place can help in having a tidy house, and it takes less effort.
Jim Meckelburg
Davies Street, Beaconsfield

Not happy
YOUR article “Millions of plastic pellets pollute river” (Herald, November 5, 2016) states that these pellets were found on November 2.
A friend and I were walking dogs on the river Monday October 17 and noticed thousands of these pellets all along the foreshore, mainly at Northbank, in a 20cm-wide strip.
Soon after we saw two men with Fremantle port authority logos on their shirts and they said it was a contentious issue as to who was responsible for the clean-up and who actually caused the problem.
They said they were notified by the Fremantle council. We explained how detrimental they were to marine life.
Next morning the pellets were still there, so I rang the Port Authority which said it knew nothing, but assured me something would be done.
Obviously nothing was done, with both Fremantle Port Authority and Fremantle Council passing the buck.
There needs to be a designated department to deal with these sorts of environmental issues.
Not happy!
Susan Savage
Binns Ct, North Fremantle


Leave a Reply