The danger in this concentration on vocabulary tailoring is that
it will appear either silly or deceptive. When someone finds
out what "biosolids" actually *are* will they laugh or get mad?
Speaking as someone who has had improperly reapplied biosolids
approach my rustic residence by surface laminar flow, I can say
that "OH BIOSOLIDS!" was not the term that sprang instantly to exclamation.
Clear and conventional language, carefully applied, can convey the
meaning it needs to. The goal is understanding, for once people
understand *why* composting is vital, then they will start to view
raked-grass-wet-old-leaves-cow-manure-coffee-grounds-carrot-peels-
and-some-really-gross-brown-stuff-lying-in-a-big-pile as a thing
of high value, if not beauty, even if it is called "waste".
Cheers,
Jonathan Haskett
On Wed, 18 Oct 1995 KASHMANIAN.RICHARD@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV wrote:
>
> I agree that many people currently do compost at home. But how many do not?
> If
> we assume that up to 5-10 percent of the households compost at home, then 90-
> 95 percent do not. Your example does not hold up when we consider the much
> larger number of people not composting at home.
>
> I am interested in how you would address the other potential implications
> listed in
> my previous e-mail message from using "yard waste/trash," i.e., the impact on
> source separation, support for siting facilities, how facilities are
> regulated, the
> demand for compost, etc. In various, sometimes complex, ways, words can
> affect
> these factors. For example, word choice can have major regulatory
> implications.
> In at least one state, there is a law that bans the receipt of "wastes" onto
> farms
> even for composting. This would make it very hard to compost properly if
> additional feedstock materials were needed to mix with pure manure, for
> example,
> but not available on the farm, and were referred to and classified as "waste."
> This
> mislabelling represents a hindrance for on-farm composting. In addition, why
> was
> the city of Seattle concerned that use of the term "yard waste" inadvertently
> encouraged some residents to mix flower pots, water hoses, and other unwanted
> materials in with their leaves and grass clippings? Also, why did the Water
> Environmental Federation create a task force to develop a new term to replace
> "(municipal sewage) sludge" -- "biosolids" -- and then a task force to develop
> ways
> to implement this new term? Why does the National Bark and Soil Producers
> Association prefer "yard trimmings" to "yard waste" and "yard trash" and
> discourage the use of negative words on their members product labels. Etc. I
> do
> not believe their concerns are imaginary.
>
> I am very surprised (actually I am stunned) that you believe it does not
> matter what
> we call things. In your rosy example, how many people would buy roses if they
> were called something else -- e.g., thorn flowers? And who would name their
> daughter "Thorn Flower"? If you are correct that names do not matter, then
> why
> was the Chinese gooseberry renamed the kiwi fruit and the alligator pear
> renamed
> the avocado? Why did Kentucky Fried Chicken rename itself KFC? Why did Sugar
> Corn Pops and Sugar Crisp become Corn Pops and Golden Crisp, respectively?
> Etc. The answer to these questions is that it was believed that the consumer
> would become more attracted to the newly-named products.
>
> If words do not mean anything, please explain why companies spend so much
> money creating the right image for their products by the words they use and
> pictures they create? They "package" and present their products in positive
> ways.
> No matter how you cut it, composting and compost need to be marketed,
> including
> the process, the technology and the end product. How successful will
> composting
> be if it is improperly "packaged"? Would you be able to successfully sell a
> product
> called "Pond Scum" (assuming it is a safe, processed product) as fish food?
> You
> would probably want to call it something else, let's say "Nature's Nutrients."
>
> Word changes alone will not change how we manage organics, but they point us
> in
> the right direction. The words we use to refer to these organics help shape
> what
> we do with them. The use of neutral or positive words has a greater chance to
> lead to positive behavior than does the use of negative words. And in
> subsequent
> printed materials, we can communicate why we are changing terminology to give
> greater impetus to its acceptance and the desired changes.
>
> Composting will never reach its full potential as long as we use these types
> of
> negative words. The future of composting is in our hands. We can choose to
> be
> wise, protect it, and nurture it, or we can continue to refer to composting as
> "disposal" and the materials we compost as "waste." You know where I stand on
> this important issue.
>
> If you want to use quotes to support our different views, the following
> quotations
> may interest you:
>
> "Without knowing the force of words, it is impossible to know men."
> Confucius
> "There is a weird power in a spoken word. ... And a word carries far --
> very
> far ... ." Joseph Conrad
> "A word is dead When it is said, Some say. I say it just Begins to live
> That
> day." Emily Dickinson
> "Once a word has been allowed to escape, it cannot be recalled."
> Quintus
> Horatius Flaccus
> "Good words are worth much, and cost little." George Herbert
> "Words have a longer life than deeds." Pindar
> "False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul
> with
> evil." Plato
> "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action; with this special
> observance, that you o'erstep not the modesty of nature." William
> Shakespeare
> "Ill deeds are doubled with an evil word." William Shakespeare
> "Proper words in proper places, make the true definition of a style."
> Jonathan Swift
> "A powerful agent is the right word. Whenever we come upon one of those
> intensely right words in a book or a newspaper the resulting effect is
> physical as well as spiritual, and electrically prompt." Mark Twain
> "Choice word and measured phrase, above the reach of ordinary men."
> William Wordsworth
> "The direction in which education starts a man will determine his future
> life."
> Plato
> "We should all be concerned about the future because we will have to
> spend
> the rest of our lives there." Charles Franklin Kettering
>
> Richard Kashmanian
> kashmanian.richard@epamail.epa.gov
>
> *******************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 1995 KASHMANIAN.RICHARD@epamail.epa.gov wrote:
>
> > Subject:
> > Re: FWD: Compost BMP Table of Contents/Words Speak Louder Than Actions
> >
> > I can barely stomach seeing leaves, grass clippings, and brush referred
> > to as "yard waste" and "yard debris," but to see these fine compost and
> > mulch feedstock materials referred to as "yard trash" still strikes me as
> > utterly unbelievable. Especially from a group that is supposed to be
> > advocating their recovery and recycling. Compost and mulch are very
> > valuable, yet their value is automatically diminished by this unfortunate
> > choice of words. Please explain how "yard trash" will encourage anybody
> > to want to: compost or mulch at home; properly source separate organics
> > for composting or mulching; support the siting of a clean,
> > source-separated compost or mulch facility; avoid over-regulating the
> > facility; or purchase compost or mulch. It is hard for new behaviors to
> > take root when old (misleading and inaccurate) words tied to old
> > behaviors are still used. I have never seen a competing product to
> > compost, mulch, or another recycled product successfully marketed that
> > also claimed its ingredients are made from "trash," "waste," or similar
> > negative-image making materials. "Yard trimmings" works a lot better and
> > does not send negative messages. For further information on vocabulary
> > issues, please read my editorials in BioCycle (April 1993 and August
> > 1994), Resource Recycling (May 1995), and the Leaf Mulch Network (July
> > 1995). Thank you.
> Jonathan Haskett's 10/6/95 response:
>
> I feel your pain, but you know many decaffinated brands taste
> almost as good. Lots of duitiful composters refer to the stuff as
> "yard waste" and don't even put it out for the sanitary engineers
> to remove. I don't think it makes much difference what its called,
> to coin a phrase "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
>
> *******************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
>
> Jonathan Haskett
> jhaskett@asrr.arsusda.gov
>
> "The fault dear Brutus lies not within our stars but in ourselves."
>
>
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Jonathan Haskett
jhaskett@asrr.arsusda.gov
"The fault dear Brutus lies not within our stars but in ourselves."