How can putting poop in a baggie, tying it up and depositing it in a landfill more environmentally responsible than leaving said poop to decompose naturally? I do understand that it’s more neighborly and a good practice to remove poop from areas that other people will be using, but to say that it’s more environmentally responsible is just wrong as far as I can tell.
Poop dissolves away while a plastic bag lasts for thousands of years. I reject the idea that bagging poop is an environmental positive. It it is about stepping in it, I follow. But do not agree.
It isn’t. Anyone arguing otherwise is doing so from the “eww factor” rather than from a factual standpoint. There are plenty of good reasons to keep pet cats indoors; that is not one of them.
Let’s fight some ignrance.
Pet Waste and Water Quality – University of Maryland Cooperative Extension Service (WARNING- PDF)
Pet Waste, Watre Quality, and Your Health – Wilmington, NC handout (WARNING- PDF) [ignore the password request, this loaded for me anyway]
Pet Waste is Turning Streams into Sewers
Nonpoint Source Pollution Education: Managing Pet Waste (Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection)
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Q&A
Fairfax County watershed protection tips
City of Rockville Pet Waste brochure (WARNING - PDF)
Brief highlights:
Pet waste is not part of natural balance in exurban areas
Occurs in unnaturally high concentrations
Nitrogen in runoff steals oxygen from water
Nitrogen in runoff propotes overgrowth of algae
Contains bacteria and disease-causing organisms
It’s not an issue of being environmentally more responsible in some vaguely-defined “overall” way. It’s that the watersheds, bays, and the Chesapeke Bay in particular are desperately at a breaking point and we need to protect them right now even if it means some plastic bags or flushing.