Solution To Beach Littering Solution Research (Essay Sample)

Beach Littering Solutions
Beach littering by people is becoming a major global concern as litter in beaches continue to rise (Tjell 863). The main types of litter found on beaches include plastic materials, cigarette butts, glass beverage bottles, beverage cans, paper bags, caps or lids and food wrapper materials. These materials are disposed of by people as they go to the beaches for leisure or during the summer when the weather is favorable. Litter from beaches has far reaching adverse social and economic effects on human beings. The litter also affects the lives of animal species in the seas and oceans leading to death and extinction of some. A study on beach water conducted in 2007 by MCs found out that volunteers collected approximately 346,000 items. More so, an average of more than 2,000 bits of litter or two bits of rubbish was collected on a 168.5 km coastal stretch (Schultz et al. 37). The litter dumped on beaches can injure or harm people as well as damaging the aesthetic beauty of the environment. In another study, Torgler, Frey, and Wilson note that about 100,000 turtles and marine mammals are killed by plastic litter swept from beaches (n p). The following measures can be used to curb the littering menace caused by people on beaches.
Fines and penalties should be imposed on individuals who dispose waste materials on the beach (Gerace n p). This approach makes it less appropriate for people to feel "okay" when throwing litter anyhow. Larger fines would mean more revenue to the government which plays a vital role in enforcing litter management policies. The amount of fines and penalties imposed should vary depending on the amount and type of waste disposed of. For instance, the weight or volume of waste is used to determine the severity of the penalty in ten states in the United States (Mangone 454). The amount charged should also vary depending on the number of times the individual has committed the crime. The fine charged for first-time conviction in Alabama is $ 250 while subsequent convictions attract a fine of $ 500 (Mangone 455).
In addition to imposing fines and penalties, this policy should be accompanied by serving a jail term for severe cases (Tjell 864). People who are found disposing more litter and at a high frequency should be subjected to more than financial implications. Minor cases face less jail term while severe cases face more jail term with an addition of penalties. For instance, in Massachusetts, first-time violators are fined $5,500 while subsequent convictions attract up to $15,000. The violators may also be required by the court to remove the litter at their expense. Fifty percent of the imposed fine is saved for the conservation trust. A driver arrested for this offense faces up to seven days of suspension (Mangone 456).
In the event of mass littering, individuals who commit the offense should be personally liable for any cost incurred in cleaning the litter. This requirement should cover any financial cost incurred in removing the litter as well as any foregone benefit that occurs as a result of dumping litter on the beaches. This situation is more evident where individuals prefer some beaches at the expense of others which are deemed "dirty" as a result of littering. In the Michigan state, violators are required to pay for the cost of removing the litter and any property damage that arises in the process (Mangone 457).
Williams and Micallef suggest that People who litter any material that poses any health hazard should face stiffer penalties and possible long-term jail terms (n p). For instance, the disposing litter of any material from a health facility is considered a misdemeanor and the violation is punishable by serving a term of up to six months and a fine of $1,000, or both. Litter that is infectious or is pathological in nature is considered a felony. This violation is punishable by incarceration of up to two years and a fine of $5,000, or both. Subsequent convictions in this state are punishable incarceration of up to five years and a fine of more than $ 10,000 (Mangone 458). Therefore, the type of litter disposed of should determine the type and severity of punishment individual faces. This way, littering any hazard waste is put under control.
Banning individuals who violate beach regulations by disposing of litter presents another control measure to reduce beach pollution. The local government, as well as the beach management teams, should ensure that any individual convicted for littering the beach is banned from accessing them. This will ensure that people exercise due care when operating their business on the beach if they want to continue enjoying its benefits. Law courts and the authorities at the ground should work hand in hand to ensure that these convicts bear full responsibility for their actions (Williams and Micallef n p)
Schultz also adds that people should be banned from using the non-biodegradable material on the beach (35). These materials include all plastic materials and glasses that never decompose hence become a threat to aquatic life as well as human life. The Manhattan Beach ban on plastic bags provides a great example in this case. Instead of these non-biodegradable materials, the city of Manhattan Beach persuades people to use reusable bags. The Manhattan city council banned all single-use plastic bags at all points of sale and imposed a charge for using plastic bags (Schultz 36). Huntington Beach also adopted this ordinance in 2013 and imposed a pass-through charge of ten cents for every paper bag used. Others areas to have applied these ordinances include Fort Bragg, Solana Beach, Daly City, Manhattan Beach, South Lake Tahoe and Colorado among others (Schultz 37). These ordinances help to reduce the number of paper bag waste that is found on beaches.
Another solution to the littering menace is to impose compulsory cleaning by the beach community (Gerace n p). This allows the people around to take beach cleaning as their responsibility and also check each other. The beach management authorities in collaboration with the local governments should set specific days for general clean up of beaches involving all members of the community. The local government should provide any necessary equipment for the activity. Items such as trash bags, pickup sticks and gloves should be purchased from fines imposed on the beach littering offenders. Repetition of this process over a period ensures that beaches are tidy throughout. For example, Rwanda has a clean and classic sandy beach known as Gisenyi at the end of Lake Kivu. The community in Rwanda is mandated to undertake a mandatory clean- up where all Rwandese participate once in a month (Karvazy and Webster n p). This way, the beach and other areas of the country remain clean. However, this move faces resistance from some people who feel that it is the responsibility of the local governments to maintain beach cleanliness.
Another important measure is to ensure that people do not develop structures such as tourist hotels and resorts too close to the beaches (Marine Litter Solutions n p). The construction of such structures results in littering the beaches by the waste material from them. Also, people in those hotels and lounges litter the beaches by carrying plastic materials such as fresh water and juice bottles (Marine Litter Solutions n p). Individuals, as well as hotels, should be held accountable for any litter that that results from them. This way, the hotel management would advise its customers on the right way to dispose of their litter. As a precautionary measure, they should provide litter bins for waste disposable to their customers.
The local governments in areas with beaches should push for compulsory litter bins within the beaches. Any person who disposes of litter other places other than the litter bins should face severe penalties (Musereau, Jonathan and Hervé 16). The notion behind this move is that people are too lazy to walk their trash to available litter cans. Availing more cans scattered across the beach would induce people to take their trash to those cans hence reducing littering.
Additionally, people should be forced to attend seminars and workshops conducted by beach stakeholders to educate the masses on maintaining cleanliness on the beach. Most people think they know all about beach littering and therefore feel it is unnecessary to attend such seminars. The beach management authorities should ensure that those who attend such seminars are accorded privileges when they visit the beaches (Musereau, Jonathan and Hervé 17). These added benefits would include discounted beach rides or reduced entry fees. The organizers should provide attendance cards to acknowledge those who attend such seminars and these would be needed at entry points to enjoy extra benefits.
Control measures should be put in place to control litter that results from beach parties (Mangone 460). Beach parties present a threat to the beaches by acting as sources of litter. Party revelers throw away beer cans and other sorts of bottles and materials that pollute the beaches. Litter left after beach parties as raising eyebrows, especially in the UK beaches. According to a report, the beach litter in the UK rose by a third in 2016 as compared to 2015. The number of plastic bottles found on the beach rose to 43% while metal drinks can rose to 29% while lids and caps increased by 41% (Schultz 42). This increase in the litter is attributed to the frequent beach parties that usually happen during the summer. Musereau, Jonathan, and Hervé suggest that fines and penalties should be imposed on those who litter beaches during such events (19). For instance, the staff members of Ruschmeyer’s were fined for dumping litter while on their staff party on Montauk Beach in Long Island. The four members were each fined $6,000 for the...