I pulled into the parking lot at work Monday morning about the same time as Wayne, another faculty member. As we got out of our cars (he a truck, to be precise) our ears were assaulted by the horrendous volume of one of the groundskeepers running one of those leaf blower machines. The air was filled with choking dust. We griped about it to each other, remarking that the San Jaoquin valley is already one of the asthma capitals of the nation. Wayne, an anatomy and biology professor, said he had a mind to talk to the college president about it.
Later on, as I neared my own building, another one of the infernal devices was being used on the pavement there. It created a similar atmosphere, pun intended, of ear-damaging noise and lung-contaminating particulates. Are these things really necessary? I think I'd support banning the wretched nuisances as health hazards.
They have been banned in 20 California cities so far. You can go to a site explaining their ill effects, listing the cities that have prohibited them, and containing a sample resolution your city council can pass here. The site is called "What You Should Know About Leaf Blowers." The pithiest sentence there is this: "Leaf blowers are more accurately dust blowers; they blow dust from one place to another, containing fertilizers, pesticides, dog and cat fecal matter, top soil, etc." They operate at 90 decibels when 85 causes hearing loss, and gas-powered machines emit "as much tailpipe emissions in an hour as an automobile does over 350 miles. The difference is that a car emits all that pollution over a big stretch of road while the leaf blower deposits it all in one back or front yard."
4 comments:
I like the idea of a ban but we should offer a viable alternative... sweeping, hosing and raking? Be prepared to hire 15 extra people!
Last fall I raked the leaves on my lawn while the guy next door blew his. Both yards have several oak trees, and both jobs took about an hour and a half. The difference was that he was obnoxious to the whole neighborhood and polluted like crazy while I bothered no one and got a good dose of cardiovascular exercise.
Interesting point, I was just pleased that the campus finally took the initiative to clean that place up. With the amount of tuition and fees we pay there you'd think they'd show a little more pride in their grounds (I specifically remember a blue pillow sitting in the parking lot for at least 4 weeks).
However, with the disturbing amount of air pollution in this valley as it is, I completely agree with you. I have yet to see them blow the debris anywhere in particular, except in circles around the campus. (Job security perhaps?)
Speaking of job security, to counter John's statement, what better source of cheap labor than hungry college kids? Too bad earth day just passed, they could have held a "clean up your campus" initiative and for some pizza, and maybe T-shirts, that place would be sparkling; asthma attack-inducing, ear-shattering, global warming, cat crap spreading, leaf blower-free.
If there's interest that school would definitely benefit from an Environmentalist group. The closest I see on the site is the Student Organization for Animal Preservation (SOAP), although that slightly unnerves me considering what soap was originally made out of.
When I first interviewed at COS to work there I was nicely impressed by the appearance of the grounds. It's very hard for the staff to keep them up because they are quite shorthanded, even compared to other California Community Colleges. I think your idea of employing students at minimum wage to help with some of this work has merit!
Post a Comment