359 Degrees

We've got a 2 acre lot with tons of mature trees, if you want to bag all the leaves and put them on the curb I'm all for it.  

Scott Replies:

Thank you for your comment.  I'll include it in the presentation to the BPW.

Burning should be outlawed for all the obvious reasons.  It is some kind of wierd throw-back to the 1950's that leaf burning is still allowed here.

Options for Brookfield1947 would include:

1.  Use a mulching mower.  Admittedly, you trade gas consumption for burning leaf pollution, but their is a great benefit to you lawn.

2.  Mulch in a pile on some corner of your large property.  Leaves rapidly reduce to about 10% of their original volume as they dehydrate and break down.  Next spring, you'd have a great supply of leaf compost.

3.  The city could consider, in some locations, curbside pick-up of leaf piles by frontloader and dump truck, skipping the bags.  This is done in some cities.  This can be very beneficial in areas of dense tree cover (actually describes much of Elm Grove more than Brookfield, but you get the idea).

We live in a neighborhood that has been built on wooded lots. We have two gigantic 50-year-old maples that dump their leaves plus other trees leaves that blow in our yards. We burn throughout the summer and fall and also utilize the dump. We feel this works fine. As for your solutions above:

1.) Mulching mowers don't work on a ton of leaves, rather only on small amounts. It makes confetti in your yard and leaves a mushy mess in the spring. I would know, we tried that route a few times.

2.) Another service in Brookfield means the potential for raising our taxes even more.

3.) We deal with tree droppings all summer and fall, so just a fall pick up wouldn't help us.

4.) If we did bag for pick-up, we would literally have at least 30 bags of leaves. Having plastic bags in our landfills doesn't sound any more environmentally friendly than burning organic waste.

5.) If we didn't bag for pick-up and left heaping piles of leaves in our ditches it blows around the neighborhood and makes a mess. I know this because some residents in our neighborhood already use this technique and it's frustrating to those who clean their yards.

6.) We will soon have a new and improved fire station response time, so no worries on if any of the fires get out of control, right?

Scott's reply:

Those are all legitimate points to be considered.  Waukesha and Wauwatosa (comparable in many ways to Brookfield) have curbside pickup.  A big truck with a vacuum sucks them up.  They are sent to composting yards.  In fact, the current pilot program requires the use of biodegradable (paper) bags to allow such composting.  It has been illegal to landfill yard waste for several years.

An additional complication is that other cities have curb and gutter to contain the leaves.  Brookfield's ditches would clog with leaf piles during rainstorms and cuase flooding.  It's a trade off between a lifestyle (no curbs, sidwalks, etc.) and the convenience of providing a public service (leaf collection).

And you are correct - everything costs money.  It's a balance between expense and public health, quality of life for people who don't like or can't medically tolerate smoke and disposal.

I would agree with a ban on burning, however, there have to be reasonable alternatives provided to residents.

The Veolia system is in theory a good one.  However, for the average resident, the number of stamps for pickup that have to be purchased at one time is excessive.  If I purchased the minimum number, it would take us YEARS to get through all of them.  If the progam allowed for smaller quantities (ie 10) to be purchased, I think that you'd have better participation.

Scott's reply:

The following file is a FAX from Veolia with the details and schedule for 2008.

20080417_VeoliaYardwastePickup.pdf

We also have a heavily wooded property, with hundreds of trees. We do use a mulching mower and don't bag leaves but let them decompose where they drop, or rake leaves that fall into the landscaped areas into the wooded areas. The decomposition takes a couple years but does amend the soil. Alternatively, my neighbor has a service, a bunch of guys swarm over her yard, rake up all the leaves and animal poop (she likes to feed the 30 wild turkeys that have taken up residence there,) and hauls it all away (no doubt to a landfill.) So there are different ways of dealing with all that which don't require burning.

The problem we have is the huge numbers of dying trees (Dutch Elm disease has plagued our property) and the huge number of invasives (buckthorn and honeysuckle.) We haul trailer after trailer load of cut up logs/trees/shrubs to the dump--almost every weekend all summer. For people who don't have a  truck and trailer, or can't afford all those trips to the dump, disposal of large trees and invasive shrubs is a real problem and a very expensive one. It costs hundreds to thousands of dollars to remove dead trees. And it isn't a one time deal for property owners with wooded lots. That's where I see the need, and burning may be the only way to deal with this for some folks. There are a lot of heavily wooded areas in the city, and the disposal problem is not just confined to the leaf drop of a couple landscape trees in your yard.

We don't burn (yet) but I have no objection to it. We do have an outdoor fireplace that we enjoy for most of the year. Is there the intention to ban burning in firepits, outdoor fireplaces and charcoal grills?

Great idea Scott.

But I have a neighbor whose entire yard is a waste! What's more, it is slowly convincing all of the surrounding yards to follow it to perdition.

Do they sell a bag large enough to handle that problem?

Scott's reply:

Go fish on Mrs. Kilkenny's site.  If you follow the links in my original posting, you will read how vigorously she supported a total ban on leaf burning.  Surely she's in touch with the residents!

Winegirl, you can bet that the next step is banning firepits. It's ridiculous that these people spend so much time trying to ban leaf burning. I can think of a lot of other things for our elected officials to work on than to solve a non-issue by creating a bigger bureaucracy and higher taxes. Can we PLEASE elect some conservative minded people who will not cowtow to the do-gooders?

I agree why do I have to buy 50 stickers at a cost of $75.  When I lived in Kansas City the local hardware stores sold the same stickers and you could buy as many as you want.  I would use the Veolia service but I am not dropping $75 to do it and hope that I use all those stickers, and they continue to honor them, over the next 10 years....

Scott's reply:

The Veolia service is a 2 year trial program paid for with user fees.  i.e. no tax dollars and very minimal staff time.  It was intended to get some real data on what "reasonable" means in terms of bag size, frequency of collection, cost, etc. 

I fully support the ban on leaf burning. We have 5 large leaf dropping trees and make a number of trips to the recycling center every fall using the trunk of our car or the back of our minivan.  It is doable.

Well in my opinion there is nothing reasonable about a 50 sticker minimum.  So when the 2 year trial is up all those people who spent $75 are out of luck unless they had a whole lot of bags.  Do you really think the average citizen is putting out 25 bags/bundles a year?  I understand taxpayers aren't paying for it, but gouging those who do isn't a good plan either.

Oddly, this stream has focused mostly on the mechanics of leaf removal, and that is a fair topic.  I bought 50 stickers last year and have a enough for three or more years still.

Still, we need to get back to the bigger problem.  The EPA website clearly speaks to the toxic irritants and particulates in leaf burning.  The volume of material and the incomplete combustion of leaves makes this a much bigger problem than outdoor fires or barbeques.  We have all seen days when the air is visibly contaminated by leaf burning.  We obviously have a problem.

The problem is much larger for those with compromised lungs.  For the child with asthma, a bad day can keep him inside, or bring him to the ER with an attack.  And yes, people do occasionally die during a severe asthma attack.  For the elderly using oxygen tanks to get by, the additional irritation from leaf burn may keep them from usual activity.

So I'm a do-gooder.  My point of view defends those whose health can be compromised by leaf smoke.

Who do you defend?

Give me a break. I'd love to see the statistics through the years (if there even are any) of any and all deaths or severe complications directly related to "leaf burning". It's one of those causes people take up where a very minor activity plays a miniscule role in the "normal" cycles of our climate. It seems that as time goes on and the wackos gets wackier, everything we do has some sort of negative effect on us.

And who do I defend? All Americans with common sense who are sick of having their freedoms stepped on by the environmentalists.

Remarkably, Imnotpc has taken a weak argument, and made it weaker.  As a personal freedom argument, leaf burning is indefensible.

My right to swing a baseball bat ends, of course, at your nose.  Both of our personal freedoms, (the freedom to swing a bat, and the freedom from a broken nose) should be government protected.  You may believe you have the freedom to burn in your backyard.  I have the freedom to breathe clean air at my back porch.  Therefore, if you can burn in your back yard and keep the pollution there, have at it.  You are alarmed at one person's attack on open burning as denying your freedom, yet you are blind to the freedom you take from that person with your smoke.  The whole argument in favor of open burning is weakened when viewed in this light because nuisance or irritation (not biologic risk)is enough for society to limit an activity.  You have no right to pollute my air, just like you have no right to a 100 decibel party in your backyard at 1am.

You want science.  Go to the web, find it by the pound (ie www.lungusa.org/.../pp.asp).

You are wrong on public policy, you are wrong on the science.  You defend polluters over people with lung disease.  You defend the personal freedom of those who would trample the freedom of their neighbors.

The only way it would work is curbside pick up.  I am not mulching 2 acres of leaves nor bagging or hauling 2 acres of leaves every year.  I did not get through buring last year before the snow fell and have a pile of leaves 4X15 left, they do not break down over a winter to 10% of their size.  

Then we have a done deal.

One or two mass leaf collections on schedule by the city in the fall. Encourage bagging by getting Veolia to sell stickers in smaller numbers.  Educate about composting, or using the Brookfield compost drop-off.  Run an optional burn/compost cycle this fall, outlaw outdoor burning of refuse effective 1/1/09.

Scott replies:

Sounds like a plan.  Want to help me sell it to the rest of Brookfield?

All the "leaf-burning ban" supporters are full of their own "smoke and mirrors" and it makes me gag more than the smell of fall leaves burning!  Close your windows and let freedom reign!

I agree 100% with Contrarians suggestions and solutions.  Having a few scheduled times at the height of leaf fall and once in spring for bringing a vacuum type truck through the city seems to solve the biggest problem for larger lot owners who are the largest opposition to leaf burning and should be a cheaper, more efficient alternative to the tag and bag method. Though the tag n bag method (even limited to a few known pickup times) is still a decent alternative due to lack of curb in many locations. Education about composting would be a nice add, along with having a Source for mid size compost bins similar to the ones sold by Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful ( http://www.kgmb.org/about.html ) for $60, or we could have them educate and demonstrate at the Farm Market or at the recyle center.

I believe Contratrians responses to Intewrps/Imnotpcs 'views' are especially informative and precise. I think is it interesting when someone mentions freedom and liberties, and then tells someone to sticker his mouth shut in true hypocritical fashion.

Brookfield1947, I believe you that the leaves did not mostly compost over winter. The unfortunate fact about it is that composting is very slow in the winter, and brown leafy matter needs to be blended with some green matter (along with some warm weather and water) for thorough composting. I collect some mulched grass clippings and mix them into mulched leaves. Mulching the leaf piles (simply riding over them with a mower) will break them down to less than half the size and greatly increase composting rate while providing protective mulch for early spring plants and nutrients to the trees and other plants. It may not look quite as clean, but it is more healthy for your plants. It might even inhibit some of the garlic mustard.

Winegirl,

It sounds like you are doing everything right. I believe This ban relates directly to leaf burning, and not firepits, which are a common thing in backyards nowadays. I think the referendum might even make direct mention of still allowing fire pit type wood fires. It sounds like you have alot of fuel for those fires, which also produce much less particulates and smoke than the leaf matter fires and wood fires are generally much smaller in scale.

Personally I am not opposed to periodic leaf burning, but I know that they can be an annoyance to others and even produce medical conditions, on top of being environmentally unhealthy, so I believe the practice should be limited at best.

I am not sure what the WI DNR recommends for Dutch Elm Disease, but thinning and dead branch removal helps prevent spread, and stripping bark from infected trees and keeping them for firewood or chipping into mulch is considered adequate at least by some.

Why don't you just put a tax on all the SUV's in the city of Brookfield  that cause much more pollution than any burning of yard waste to pay for the pickup?

Or, why don't you create a sun-set law that when a residence is sold in the city they can no longer burn yard waste.  That would appease those of us who have been around awhile, have mature yards, but don't have the means that others have to carry lots of waste to a disposal site.

Or require those who want to prohibit the burning to make the pick ups themselves.

Re: large tree removal: Dutch Elm was diagnosed by a professional arborist 15 yrs ago when we first had a survey of the property. The only management is to remove the entire tree, which dies rapidly over a period of several months. The disease is spread through the roots and we have many trees in a forested area with interconnected roots. So we cut down about 10 trees a summer , cut them up and haul trailer after trailer of branches to the dump. We cannot possibly use all the brush for firewood, since there is simply too much.

The next challenge will be removal of ashes when the emerald ash borer hits since native ashes have been populating the woods in place of the elms. However, after that, most of the trees will be gone and we'll have less of a problem, although much less of a leafy green canopy to shade the yard and house during summer. That canopy allows us to use less air conditioning in summer and also removes pollutants from the air.

One of my concerns, as mentioned by other readers, is the huge amount of air pollution generated by the hundreds of trips to the dump every week. Unless you've been there, you don't realize how much vehicular traffic is generated by the need to drive your "stuff" to the dump. There are really no other alternatives than to buy a trailer and a vehicle that can tow a trailer, and haul all the excess that cannot be composted or otherwise disposed of on site.  The dump is a hotbed of activity on the days it's open. If burning is banned altogether, that would increase even more.

I have had asthma all my life. I manage it by multiple medications. However, my asthma definitely improves when I do not have to be in traffic. Burning doesn't bother me much: if the smoke is too heavy, I close the house up for a couple hours. Air pollution due to unecessary and excessive vehicular traffic is present 24/7, especially on high ozone days. That's when I have to stay inside 24/7. So pick your poison, I guess.

c'mon there are much more important things to concentrate on.  This is a pathetic waste of time.