Town puzzled about why recycling is on the decline

Town councillors are struggling to understand the consistent drop in the amount of recyclables people are placing in their blue boxes.

Reviewing the report of the joint recycling committee at its meeting on March 1, council wanted to know why the amount of recyclable materials being collected in Hawkesbury, East Hawkesbury and Champlain.

According to the report, prepared by recycling co-ordinator Robert Lefebvre, the tonnage report for the 2009 indicates that 1,325.40 tonnes of recyclable material was collected, compared to 1,345.05 in 2008, representing a reduction of 1.48 per cent.

For the month of January 2010, Lefebvre reported that a total of 107.11 tonnes of recyclable material had been collected, compared with 118.22 tonnes in January 2009. That represents a decrease of 11.11 tonnes or 9.3 per cent.

"I see from this report that it appears people are doing less recycling," said mayor Jeanne Charlebois. "Do we know why this is happening?"

Councillor Gilbert Cyr, who is the town's representative on the committee, admitted committee members don't know why people aren't recycling as much as they previously did.

"Perhaps we need to think seriously about re-educating the public about recycling and reminding people that the planet belongs to everyone," the mayor said. "We all need to do our part."

Charlebois asked chief administrative officer (CAO) Normand Beaulieu whether or not schools in the area have their recyclable materials collected. Beaulieu said that, to his knowledge, the school board "refuses to pay" for recycling pick-up.

"I don't know what they do with their recycles," he said.

A report presented by the joint recycling committee in December 2009 indicated that the recycling program in this area is not as efficient or cost-effective as similar programs in other counties.

It is estimated that the cost of recycling in the three municipalities is more than three times higher than some neighbouring municipalities.

Lefebvre discussed the recycling grant announcement for 2010 as part of his report. He noted the grant allocation for the Hawkesbury and area joint recycling program was $135,847, in comparison with the 2009 allocation of $147,678.

"This (allocation) is based upon a new methodology of grant calculation for blue box programs in municipalities in order to increase effectiveness and efficiency of recycling programs," he explained in the report. "From 2002 to 2007 inclusively, the recyclable material collected had an annual average increase of 7.8 per cent with the exception of the year 2008, which increased by 12.9 per cent. The projected material to be collected for the year 2009, in comparison with 2008, will decrease by approximately three per cent."

In 2008, there were 1,148 tonnes of materials thrown into blue boxes in the Hawkesbury area. The net cost was $411,370, or $358 per tonne. In 2009, the area received $147,678 in provincial funds for the program, however, that allocation will drop to $135,847 in 2010, Lefebvre noted.

"Funding will continue to decrease and improvements to grants can only be accomplished by establishing best practices thereby encouraging increased participation and collection," Lefebvre wrote in the report.
Meanwhile, Lefebvre's report indicates that other municipalities in the region collect more recyclables than Hawkesbury-area municipalities.

For example, in 2008, a total of 1,223 tonnes of recyclable materials was collected in North Glengarry, where the cost per tonne was $102. Russell collected 1,400 tonnes where the cost was $189 per tonne. It is expected that North Glengarry will see its funding rise from $33,098 in 2009 to $93,806 this year, while Russell will see its funding increase from $104,234 to $154,014.
In The Nation, 878 tonnes of recyclable material was collected in 2008 at a cost of $246 per tonne. The municipality's funding allocation is set to increase $87,455 to $98,715.