CANTON — A proposal to ban most rural outdoor burning split speakers evenly at a hearing Tuesday.
The hearing on the state Department of Environmental Conservation's proposal drew approximately 40, including 16 speakers, to SUNY Canton who split on banning most burning in towns with fewer than 20,000 people.
Proponents heralded health benefits — DEC says burn barrels release 17 times more dioxin and 40 times more ash than permitted incinerators — but they had reservations about outlawing small brush burning and whether it will financially harm farmers who will have to pay for plastic disposal. Opponents slammed it as an intrusion on landowners and a poorly conceived plan.
"We don't want to encourage people to burn indoors or throw it in their neighbors' yards or on the highway. Think of the consequences. The road to hell is paved with good intentions," said Miles D. Wolpin, a retired SUNY Potsdam political science professor. "This is inherently undemocratic. Why are they proposing it? Because they couldn't get it through the Legislature."
The state Assembly has repeatedly voted to extend the ban now in effect in cities, villages and towns with populations greater than 20,000 to rural communities, but it has failed to gain Senate support. DEC is proposing to modify its regulation to include rural communities. It makes exceptions for campfires, ceremonial bonfires, fire training, intentional burning to protect crops and some non-plastic agriculture waste such as twine and paper products.
Agricultural fires will have to be extinguished within less than 24 hours. The agriculture exemption does not include properties that are less than five acres.
"I'm in favor of a ban, but I understand agriculture interests," said Susan G. Klein, Pierrepont. "They do need to be considered and they have not" been.
Speakers were mostly small farmers and supporters who have long tried to get a ban passed. A June 30 hearing in Watertown drew 13 speakers, 10 of whom supported the ban. One opposed it and two asked for revisions.
DEC was presented Tuesday with 529 signatures from supporters. A Franklin County man countered by providing 709 signatures opposing the ban.
"This can't be allowed to happen," said Bart S. Bonner, Watertown. "They want to make people like me a criminal."
Speakers on both sides of the debate called for affordable waste disposal and more education about the dangers of burning plastic.
"The cost of providing alternatives to burn barrels intimidates our municipal officials. We find money somewhere for children's education. It seems to me that we can find the money to fund alternatives if we prioritize it," said Daniel Kent, a DePeyster produce farmer. "Burning trash doesn't kill your neighbors dead as a doornail as it drifts over them, but it can decades later and we can't afford the health care costs to treat ourselves this way."
Recycling was promoted by both sides.
"We need to deal with manufacturers, the whole picture," said Klaus D. Proemm, Canton, who supports the expansion of the burn ban. "We need to make materials that can be recycled. There's a real opportunity here while we're recycling to create jobs and opportunities."
DEC is accepting comments until Aug. 14. Comments can be mailed to DEC, Division of Air Resources, Attention: Robert Stanton, 625 Broadway, Albany, N.Y., 12233-3254 or e-mailed to 215fires@gw.dec.state.ny.us.
