From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: Campus Environmental Contacts
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:58:58 GMT

In article <1332900124@igc.apc.org> bserina@igc.apc.org (Bob Serina) writes:

>>>> The environmental studies faculty has approved intern credit for 
>>>> participation in the  program.

>>> Why should a group such as yourself get this kind of support when your 
>>> opponents do not?

>I am not sure our opponents are not getting support.  

Oh come off it.  Your school has a number of paid professionals (and even
academic departments from what you said) who promote environmentalist
political ideas.  Is there an "anti-environmentalist department"?

>Factions of the 
>environmental groups and the business groups routinely clash on the 
>cost-effectiveness of recycling versus disposal.  

How many of them are funded with taxpayer money?  How many of them have
campus groups and professors?

>If they wish to petition 
>their department for credit for a study to discredit recycling, more power 
>to them.

Yeah, and they will be immediately blackballed as "politically incorrect".
Asking an environmental sciences department for money to discredit
the claims of recyclers is like asking the church to fund satanic rituals.

>>>> We are planning to  send a letter to State Senator Hayden asking for a 
>>>> portion of the Cal State budget be allocated to recycling, ... .

>>> If colleges want to recycle ect. then why don't they just do it?

>In 1989 I was a charter member of the recycling club here at SJSU.  Since 
>then we have continually been fighting with the administration and the 
>grounds staff for the opportunity to place recycling containers and bins 
>on campus.

"Opportunity"?  Who is going to collect the trash in these bins and pay for
the recycling?  If it were economically viable, you wouldn't have to be
whining about all of the to the administration...they'd  be falling all over
themselves trying to recycle more.

>The people who see to it that the campus lights are kept on and the walks 
>are swept have a mandate that is outlined by the State Legislature and the 
>Board of Regents.  Whenever we recyclers ask for any support in the recycling 
>effort, we are always told that they do not have any money in the budget 
>for recycling.  That is why we are asking for even a token sum to be written 
>into the budget.

If recycling costs money then it is a waste of resources.  Besides, why should
taxpayers like me be saddled with paying for your wasteful little project?
Who are you to spend MY money anyway?

Whether it is a "token sum" or not, it is a waste if it costs money.

>Also, the state government has chosen to mandate that cities in the state 
>reduce the amount of solid waste going into their landfills.  

Well, the state makes all kinds of silly rules.  That doesn't mean it 
makes any sense.

>This effort 
>will require people trained in solid waste management.  I feel the campus 
>setting is an excellent one for future waste managers to get started in 
>their field.

Their field being instituting wasteful practices by way of government
force.  That's great.  My objection is that such political manipulation
is funded at all by public money.  I suppose campuses are good places to
learn improved techniques of Hari Krishna recruiting too, but I don't think
there ought to be government funded clubs and departments promoting the
practice.

>Any change that does not have an immediate cost advantage will have to be 
>pushed along, things such as; greenbelts around cities, endangered plant 
>and animal preservation, the elimination of things like PCBs, asbestos and 
>leaded gasoline.  

By "pushed along", you mean people will have to be forced into abiding by 
your desires whether they want to or not.  The socialists said that 
governemnt control of property was needed to eliminate poverty.  Now
you environmentalists say it is needed in order to "make things cleaner".
It was totalitarian nonsense then and it is today too.

>All of these hurt the bottom line in the short run, but those of us who 
>support them feel 

Perhaps some proof rather than feelings is appropriate here since you ARE
talking about running other people's lives.  Oh, you may not like those words,
but that IS what you are up to, isn't it?

>that, like planting a lawn in your front yard, it 
>doesn't put money in your pocket but if you prefer seeded grass to what 
>passes for native grasses these days the extra cost is worth it in the
>long run.

Why isn't there a "green lawn club" on campus then?   Or a "recycle gold
and silver club"?  It's because these things are actually worth doing, while
recycling paper, plastic, and cans is wasteful and generally not worth 
the costs.

>I hope that answers your questions, and I hope you will join us in our 
>effort to "educate" the campuses about recycling.

I do indeed think that people need to be educated on the subject, but 
the primary message people need to get is that recycling is often wasteful 
of resources, and that in such cases it shouldn't be done.  I assume that's
a perspective (along with the perspective that individual rights limit the
power of governemnt to order citizens around) which is antithetical to your
club.  Of course I am not free to use taxpayer money to subsidize the
transmission of my ideas as you are, but then again, I'm not trying to force
anyone to do what I cannot convince them to do.  You are, and is harder.

--Brian
Newsgroups: ca.environment,sci.environment