Home

Project Overview

Case Studies

Findings

Links

Who Are We?

Lane County, Oregon: Case Study

By: Kelsea Feola

1. Introduction

            Much of the information that was gathered for this study can be supplied further detail by referencing the previous year's illegal dumping final report. This case study investigates other agencies beyond those that we are already familiar with in Lane County, Oregon.

a. Geography      

Lane County, Oregon is 4,554 square miles out of Oregon's 98,386 total square miles. Of this land, 58% is owned and managed by the federal government. The U.S. Forest Service and the Oregon/Washington Bureau of Land Management are responsible for operating these governmentally owned acres. The specific ownership breakdown of these acres is demonstrated in the following table :

Lane County stretches from the Willamette Valley's Cascade Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. For comparison, this area is larger than Delaware and Rhode Island combined and almost the size of Connecticut. Although 90 percent of Lane County is forestland, Eugene and Springfield comprise the second largest urban area in Oregon after Portland.

b. Demographics

The population of Lane County is 322,959, as reported by the 2000 US Census . This population resides in the 12 incorporated cities of Coburg, Cottage Grove, Creswell, Dunes City, Eugene, Florence, Junction City, Lowell, Oakridge, Springfield, Veneta and Westfir. More than 42% of the county's population is centered in Eugene, it's population being 137,893 . The county's population per square mile is much more concentrated (70.9 people per square mile) than other Oregon counties (35.6 people per square mile) on average. This is evidenced by the centralized urban center of Eugene. The following table identifies some other basic demographic details:

Lane County, Oregon contains the fifth largest population of the thirty-one Oregon counties. Housing 9.5% of the state's total population, the table reflects that Lane County is also perceptibly affluent in comparison with its neighboring counties. Indicative to note is the 87.5% of citizens that have earned their high school diploma and the 25.5% that have earned at least a bachelor's degree. Both of these figures are higher than the national average .

Within the county, there are approximately 21,754 jobs as estimated by the Atlas of Oregon . Of these jobs, 36% are in the lumber, wood, paper and furniture industry, making it the county's largest. In the 1880s, the building of railroads boosted Lane County's timber market to one of the most competitive in the United States. Today, Lane County's lumber is managed by 3 principle organizations that provide 1,450 jobs; Weyerhaeuser, States Industries and McKenzie Forest Products. In addition to successful wood products, Lane County's economy also depends on higher education, high-tech manufacturing and tourism.

The University of Oregon and Lane Community College are both principle employers in the county. Also, tourism attracts visitors as well as laborers with the t wenty historical covered bridges, Bohemian Mines, coastal sand dunes, dozens of lighthouses, Hendricks Park Rhododendron Garden, the Hult Center for the Performing Arts, McKenzie Pass, Mt. Pisgah Arboretum, sea lion caves, and Willamette Pass ski area in the county.

2. Illegal Dumping Specifics

•  County management policies

We will now look to the legal methods by which Lane County residents can dispose of their trash.   By determining how garbage is properly serviced, we are provided with a better means for investigating the illegal dumping alternative and why it occurs.

Within Lane County, there are 7 contracted franchises that provide garbage pick-up service to the entire area; this means that every county resident has access to weekly garbage disposal service. The districts for these companies are divided throughout the county. The franchises are: Sani Pac, Lane Garbage, Apex Disposal, Royal Refuse, ASW and Richardson Sanitation. These are all privately owned franchises that operate on similar fee structures.

The largest franchise within the county is Sani Pac, servicing the entire urban area. The weekly rates for services are determined by the individual cities of Eugene and Springfield so that the actual garbage and recycling costs depend on the level of service, frequency of pick-ups, and other factors. There are three basic payment plans that Sani Pac operates. The first is the basic contract for a 32-gallon receptacle. For a weekly residential service that picks up once weekly, the charge is $17.70 or every other week is $11.70 per month. If residents have a 60-gallon can, the charge is $31.95 per month or if they empty a 90-gallon receptacle weekly it is $39.90 per month. Within Eugene alone, Sani Pac offers an alternating schedule for recycle pick-up and yard debris disposal that is included in these plans. Sani Pac will not pick up major appliances and/or other large items but will make special arrangements to dispose of them with the customer.

Within Lane County, there is one main municipal landfill. Short Mountain Landfill is located 8 miles south of Eugene off of Interstate 5. This landfill is approved for commercial waste haulers only and there are no accommodations for public trash disposal. Unfortunately, not all residents of Lane County have access to weekly garbage services. Beyond the city limits of Eugene and Springfield, the only communities with independently contracted pick-up programs are Creswell, Cottage Grove, Veneta and Florence. All other citizens must haul all of their garbage to the nearest transfer station. To accommodate these needs, there are 17 additional transfer stations located throughout the county. These stations are located in Cottage Grove, Creswell, Florence, Glenwood, London, Low Pass, Mapleton, Marcola, McKenzie Bridge, Oakridge, Rattlesnake, Sharps Creek, Swisshome, Veneta, Vida and Walton. All of these stations provide a site for residents within 12 miles of their homes to legally dispose of their trash. After each working day, the waste collected at these transfer stations is transported to the main landfill. The hours of operation for each of these transfer stations varies. Many of them have alternate summer and winter hours, but most are open 4-7 days a week from dawn until dusk.

The fee structure to legally dispose of materials is based on costs associated with special items such as refrigerators, tires, hazardous materials, asbestos, all appliances and yard debris. These costs are specific to the volume of material and are reflected as follows:  

            It is important to note that the transfer stations in Glenwood and Florence have fees that go according to weight.

b. History and severity of illegal dumping

            Lane County's illegal dumping problem has an ambiguous history. Left rather uninvestigated, it wasn't until the year 2000 that the issue began to attract the attention of county officials. This delayed reaction, however, was not due to a minimal problem but more to a lack of funding to combat it. But after an initial mass clean-up in 2002, the Eugene District's Bureau of Land Management established several regular patrol routes that are cleaned several times a month. Alan Butler reports that the severity of the illegal dumpsites were significant prior to the clean-up, "the dumping when we started a few years ago was really bad." He also reported that the areas with the most activity were in the Coburg Hills just east of Interstate 5 and also south of Cottage Grove near Dorena. "We would often get to sites that would take us a whole day to clear. There were thousands of tires, hundreds of appliances and shooting sites."

            Parks Division Manager for Lane County Public Works, Todd Winter agrees that illegal dumping has always been a consistent problem within the county's borders. "We issue citations for illegal dumping more frequent than any other type of Lane Code Violation and it has been that way for a long time." He explains that violators are non-discriminatory and dump regularly throughout the entire year. Winter also emphasizes that the illegal dumping of household trash is the most commonly dumped item and that it usually appears along roadways and forested open spaces.

Lane County Waste Management Manager, Patti Hansen, also sees the area's problem as something that has been around for a while, "People like to just go out and dump." Hansen describes 3 different kinds of garbage disposers in the county. The first group of people is residents that leave their trash on the curb and it gets cleaned up once a week by a service. The second type of disposers are self-haulers that live beyond the service range and bring their household waste into the transfer stations, paying only per visit. Hansen says that some people who do have access to weekly service still opt for this option because of the better recycling resources and the cheaper costs. The third group is the people who don't want to pay for anything and illegal dump their trash in the woods. In Lane County, all the current transfer sites used to be dumps in the 1940s and 1950s. But, to combat the growing illegal dumping problem as well as the issue of citizens allowing trash build-up on their own property, the county bought these dumps and converted them to transfer stations.

c. Deterrents, patrols and programs against illegal dumping

Alan Butler reports, "It took us months for to do the initial clean-up, post signs and organize our program." He went on to describe that the BLM narrowed down the large area that encompassed all public BLM managed lands east of Interstate 5 in Lane County into abbreviated routes where they see a concentrated flow of illegal dumping traffic. Alan Butler also explains that this "gives us a very limited view of what is going on elsewhere in those same hills." Despite this, however, Alan Butler feels that the situation may be improving, although it is difficult for a definitive answer because of the limited routes. "There is concern that because we are only working in the Coburg Hills, the dumpers have shifted their activity somewhere else." But according to Alan Butler, about a year ago, the BLM had a meeting where they expressed their appreciation for these new clean-up efforts and sought new ways to prevent the re-accumulation in the woods.

Alan Butler and his team of Youth Service workers have installed signs that warn against the consequences of illegal dumping in particular areas where there is a lot of activity. Unfortunately, though, the vandalism incurred by these signs in prevalent.

Winter shares a similar technique in order to deter illegal dumping for the Lane County Public Works. He reports that there are signs prohibiting illegal dumping in all park areas that include the $810.00 fine amount. These signs also identify the particular Lane Code that labels the illegal disposal of trash as a violation in Lane County. "Our Rangers can cite offenders up to $810.00 per occurrence and we often do," he says. The Code, Lane Code 5.527 - Illegal dumping of household or commercial waste in County Parks - Class A violation, is what they follow. Winter also describes the programs in action to combat the problem in the area, "Our Volunteer Coordinator participates with annual Down By The Riverside and SOLV (Stop Oregon Litter and Violence) work clean up groups annually. In addition we have several adopt-a-park agreements in place that families and civic groups help us keep our county clean." These agreements vary from year to year as far as which parks are adopted and how often they receive maintenance.

For the Lane County Waste Management Division, though, they see the problem as something that they should not advertise about. "The last thing we want is to advertise about all of our clean-up programs," Hansen says. "Then we will see all of the new dumpers who realized that they have people picking up after them." She goes on to explain how they combat their portion of the problem now and how they have done it in the past. "We used to pay the Sheriff's Office for an officer one day a week to go out on Saturdays and patrol the county highways looking for dumpsites." This "Garbo-Cop" program was discontinued 3 years ago after conflicts over the use of police officers. Oftentimes, Hansen recalls the officer being called away for emergencies and the Waste Management Department being able to do nothing about it.

            Now, Waste Management will donate their employees to work on the issue for a day to clean up sites. "When we get a call from a constituent or the County Commissioner that reports a sofa or whatever, we will go and pick it up, waive the disposal fees just to get it taken care of," Hansen says. "It is good to clean up the little, visible sites so that they don't accumulate. But, it is a catch-22 because then people are encouraged to dump."

d. Costs of Illegal Dumping

            The costs incurred by the agencies working on illegal dumping vary. Winter estimates that the Lane County Parks, in coordinating with the county's Public Works Department spend $15,000 annually. These cost breakdowns illustrate that approximately $10,000 per year is spent in staff time as well as an estimated $5,000.00 per year in disposal fees. This does not include, however, time spent by the 12 Lane County Park Rangers who work on the issue during their regular patrol hours. "These park rangers are combating this problem often - sometimes daily," Winter says . Despite this significant problem, Lane County Parks does not exclusively hold a position for compliance officer.

         The county's Waste Management Division is responsible for disposing of all trash in the county. But, Hansen explains, people often don't make the distinction between disposal and pick-up and therefore expect both. She says that when the Eugene District of the Bureau of Land Management has a particularly severe sight, her division will waive the costs to properly dispose of it. "We work with the sheriff work camp and the BLM to help with the big sites. They bring the garbage to us because it has to go somewhere." The BLM then gets reimbursed for the efforts with money coming from the federal government's Title 3 Initiative that promotes the clean-up of public forests. This money is then sent back to the Waste Management Department to compensate them for the waived disposal fees.

            Even with this problem, though, Hansen admits that the county does not have a specific budget to prevent illegal dumping. As it is, she thinks that in the future, it would be a smart move to contract a compliance officer. "I would like to have an officer on staff to drive around and patrol the roads," she says. Hansen emphasizes that the problem is not a budget issue, but rather a logistical problem, "Who can really drive all the logging roads and keep people from dumping?" Currently, Waste Management employs the Sheriff's 10-person work crew 4 days a week for 10 hours a day. These 40-hour workweeks cost the division roughly $120,000 annually just to maintain the Short Mountain Landfill. These wages are paid for by the department's enterprise fund, a fund that is comprised entirely of the fees collected. "We don't get tax money or federal money, we have to operate on what we accrue," Hansen explained.

If there is a particularly large site, Waste Management will deploy the work crew to clean it up. Hansen described an instance when there had been a severe site at an abandoned gas station on McVeigh Highway that cost the department upwards of $4,000 to clean. She used this example to demonstrate the variance within the problem, "It is difficult to get a dollar figure because it depends on when it takes place, where it is and how long it takes to clean up."

Lane County Public Works officer, Jeffrey Bishop, also explains that people could be making money if they were aware of their options. "People could take their metal to Schnitzer Steel. They pay for metal appliances, steel drums and auto bodies." He says that Lane County's problem may lie in a lack of awareness about what alternatives there are to illegally dumping in the forests.

e. Who is responsible for cleanup? What are the common items?

            All agencies agreed that the responsibility and cost for cleanup falls to whoever is immediately affected by the illegal dumping. The BLM carries the greatest weight in this realm. Fortunately, cleaning up sites is often a coordinated effort amongst all the agencies in the county and, sometimes, the public.

            Hansen reports that the whenever the Waste Management Division gets involved in a project, they are generally working in coordination with another agency. "It's a joint effort by the time we get on board," she says. "When we get that call from citizens or an official that reports a site at the end of their country road, we sometimes work with the Sheriff Work Crew to clean it up." She says that even though Waste Management isn't responsible for that removal, they are looked to anyways and fulfill the expectation.

            The Land Management Division feels similar about working with the other agencies, but sees their role as more of an enforcement position. Winter explained that home trash is often found alongside the roads with appliances, tires, random garage debris, building materials and furniture on side roads. Discarded meth lab materials are found as well. Most often, these items are illegally dumped in parks, along roadways and in forested open areas. There doesn't seem to be any correlation with dumping activity and the time of the year with the exception of animal carcasses. "We do see an increase in animal carcass dumping during the associated hunting seasons."

f. Consequences for Illegal Dumping

The researched agencies had varying results for the success rate of convictions or any fines actually imposed on violators. Winter reported that there are 11 Lane County Public Works employees who work on this issue of citation enforcement and that they successfully find and convict approximately 40 people per year. Their success, Winter explains, is based on a public report system that involves members of the public calling in the license plate numbers of vehicles engaged in potentially suspicious activities. The fines imposed vary. First time offenders can expect a $410.00 citation while repeaters can earn $810.00. Winter also explains that though these numbers may appear impressive in comparison with other programs, it is small proportionately to the number of offenders out there.

The Lane County Waste Management Division does not see it as their responsibility to enforce citations or pursue violators. "We don't have the man power or the badges," Hansen reports. Even when "Garbo-Cop" was employed, the officer ran into significant problems positively identifying illegal trash dumpers. Despite finding envelopes or other materials with contact information on them in the illegally dumped garbage, it was easy for suspects to shift the blame to someone else. Without proof, it was unlawful to impose a fine or citation.

Bishop reports "We go out and pick up stuff when we get the call." He also explains that there is a lot of hope for the future. "If we have someone out there identifying where the sites are and could run a pilot program to see how much it would cost us for regular clean-up, it would be great." But, a plan needs to be developed to either raise tipping fees or identify funds that could pay for a compliance officer.  

Bibliography

Bishop, Jeff. Personal Interview. April 18, 2005.

Bureau of Land Management, Oregon/Washington Home Page. U.S. Department of

the Interior. 19 Feb. 2005 <http://www.or.blm.gov/>.

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 24 and 25, 2005.

Hobbel, Jack. Personal Interview. March 20, 2005.

Lane County Overview. Lane County, Oregon e-government. 20 Feb. 2005

<http://www.or.blm.gov/eugene/Directory/index.htm>.

Lane County Waste Management Division. Lane County, Oregon e-government. 8 Mar.

2005 <http://www.co.lane.or.us/PW_WMD/RuralRates.htm>.

Loy, William. Atlas of Oregon . University of Oregon Press, Eugene. 2001. Page 84.

US Factfinder. United States Census Bureau. 21 Feb. 2005

<http://factfinder.census.gov/>.

Winters, Todd. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005.

Loy, William. Atlas of Oregon . University of Oregon Press, Eugene. 2001. Page 84.

Lane County, Oregon, e-Government. http://www.co.lane.or.us/About/quick_facts.htm. Feb. 21, 2005.

US Census Bureau . http://factfinder.census.gov/. Feb. 21, 2005.

US Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts. February 26, 2005.

Lane County, Oregon, e-Government. http://www.co.lane.or.us/About/quick_facts.htm. Feb. 21, 2005

Jack Hobbel. Personal Interview. March 20, 2005.

Jack Hobbel. Personal Interview. March 20, 2005.

Bishop, Jeff. Personal Interview. April 18, 2005.

Lane County Waste Managemnet. http://www.co.lane.or.us/PW_WMD/RuralRates.htm. 3-8-05.

Ibid.

Alan ____. Personal Interview. February 16, 2005.

Winter, Todd. Personal Interview. March 23, 2005

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005.

Ibid.

Alan ____. Personal Interview. February 16, 2005.

Winter, Todd. Personal Interview. March 23, 2005.

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005

Winter, Todd. Personal Interview. March 23, 2005.

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005.

Ibid.

Bishop, Jeffrey. Personal Interview. April 18, 2005.

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005.

Winter, Todd. Personal Interview. March 23, 2005.

Hansen, Patti. Personal Interview. March 25, 2005.

Bishop, Jeff. Personal Interview. April 18, 2005.