The District’s decision to transition to a clear garbage bag program has sparked some debate; however, staff members assert that the initiative is beginning to show positive results.
On Tuesday, Rene Recoskie, District Director of Waste Management and Environmental Services, presented to the Bracebridge General Committee on the progress of this change and addressed some common misconceptions.
Recoskie noted that the majority of waste generated in 2024 should have been diverted from garbage, emphasizing that the primary goal of the clear bag program is to ensure waste is disposed of properly. Since the program’s implementation at the beginning of March, staff have successfully diverted 150 tons of organic waste from landfills. Additionally, there have been over 800 requests for green bins since mid-February.
“It’s really great to see that impact and that change,” Recoskie remarked.
She also tackled some misunderstandings surrounding the clear bag initiative. For instance, one prevalent misconception is that organic waste placed in the garbage will decompose naturally into soil. Recoskie clarified that food waste cannot decompose effectively in landfills because it becomes compacted and lacks exposure to oxygen, which is necessary for aerobic breakdown. This contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.
Looking ahead, Recoskie indicated that staff will remain focused on an “education phase” of the program. She also pointed out that Muskoka is approaching a critical decision as waste sites continue to fill up. A choice must soon be made regarding whether to bury, incinerate, or export excess waste.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Brent Stratton i agree totally with you. Good points.
I dont believe that 150 tons has been saved from dump. Build an incinerator finally and quit burying garbage.
Recycling is much easier done at the “source” of whatever waste is being generated.
Once it has all been tossed into one bag it becomes much more difficult (and messy) to recycle the stuff.
At our resort, we try to recycle and repurpose as much as possible. Generally, if it works well we end up with a bag of garbage about every two to three weeks from our household. The rest we recycle.
* Organics we compost into our garden.
* All metal is sorted and taken to AOR when we have enough to be worth the drive. Believe it or not, these folks smile and pay you for sorted metal. It beats the reception at most district facilities.
* Paper gets burned in our heating system as it mixes well with the wood primary fuel.
What is left is a mix of mostly plastic and some glass containers and a few sort of strange containers that are made up of several items that we can’t sort out. This goes to District recycle. The main reason for this flow is we simply do not have enough of this material to be able to properly sort it and bale it or we would do this.
Despite this effort, I have to admit that tourists are not very good at recycling. There are several reasons, not least of which is that it seems no two jurisdictions in the country use the same definitions and protocols for recycling so they are confused. Another reason is dependent on where they come from. I find people from the USA simply throw out “everything” as garbage without a thought. It is simply a different mind set.
Some are just lazy, like “I’m on holiday, you do it” and they just toss the lot.
Every so often I do a bit of a forensic dig and dust off my “Garbage Bears of Muskoka” membership care, don some rubber gloves and rip open random bags from my dumpster to see how folks are doing. Yeah, I’m that stupid!
Sadly I would estimate that about 80% of the tossed “garbage” could actually be recycled if a little bit more care was made closer to the source and sorting was done better. I try to improve this with education but it seems a rather uphill battle.
The logic that “when our current dump site is “full” we are our of options” that the District likes to throw at us I simply do not believe. Have you ever driven from say Huntsville to Sudbury? The song about “rocks and trees” by the Arrogant Worms comes to mind and I simply do not believe that in the vast space of Ontario we cannot create safe and economical dumping sites anymore. Hiding behind some obscure MOECC regulation is just an easy way out for all levels of government. It is sort of that if they can write some nice sounding regulation that just cannot be complied with then, well they can’t do anything can they? If we simply cannot recycle the stuff then we need to land fill it and maybe, some day we can “mine” these sites if they are done correctly and reclaim a lot of resources this way. We have an excellent railway system running north and south in Ontario and perhaps this could be used to move the unrecycleable part of our trash to safe, out of the way but accessible in future landfill sites that are not in someone’s back yard.
Meanwhile, what do I do with the several years supply of black garbage bags sitting in my store room?
Does the public know. That green bin pick up is not allowed 🚫 from apartment buildings or condominium buildings in Huntsville? What a missed opportunity to divert green stuff from the landfill. Can you count the number of condos being built recently? These owners pay big land taxes.. For a piece of AIR, !!!
Rather than scolding your customers the tax payer, for a service taxpayers have entrusted the District to manage, maybe given that council and staff, have known for decades about a looming need for “a critical decision” on what to do with “excess waste” the real question is; How much has been set aside and invested for an incinerator, or other poorer less efficient and more costly options?
Also there is no “excess” waste, there is simply waste full stop. The district is paid to remove said waste, which is part of a social and financial contract taxpayers expect the townships and district to fufill. These emotive conjuntions “excess” and the latent timelines are being used to shift blame from managment to your customer…the tax payer. This issue is 100% a staff and council created unforced error. We pay massive salaries completely out of line with the private sector to have these issues mitigated. Failure to do so falls squarely on council and staff and nowhere else.
Has the chair, council and staff secured any further funding or a site required from the province or feds? If not, why not? This issue much like the costly negligent management of the airport is decades old.
What savings have Tax Payers realized with the uploading of services to the Province and massive slashes to services?
Is there a line item showing these savings or where they are being applied?