LBmuskoka
Lost Generosity
Posted on: 08/11/2011 07:09
There was an article in the Globe and Mail today that highlights the downside to charity - particularly crisis responses.
Goods collected for Slave Lake fire victims end up in landfill
I do not like reactive response. It is my belief, based on experience, such responses are doomed to failure. Instead, taking a proactive approach when calm prevails instead of chaos will have the most effective and long lasting success.
The world, globally and at home, is always on the precipice of disaster either natural or man made. The current response is disjointed with multiple agencies working at cross purposes. The above article provides an example of how the process breaks down: The company intended to send to the goods to the Red Cross, but the agency was only accepting cash.
In a world of instant communication this waste of heart felt generosity need not occur. However it requires a willingness on the part all those involved to work collaborately so that gifts of kindness are distributed to all those in need.
*******************
Paul Nielsen, owner of DumpRunner Waste Systems, spotted the donations, clearly marked for Slave Lake, in the landfill. There appeared to be a truckload worth of boxes – video games, children’s clothing still on the store hangers, a crib, coats and new blankets.
“This just shook me to the core because it wasn’t Uncle Bob’s golf pants from the 1970,” Mr. Nielsen said. “These were random acts of kindness all packaged up and it was just thrown in the landfill. Something went horribly wrong with this distribution.”
He contacted a supervisor at the Spyhill Landfill in hopes that something could be done. However, the supervisor, citing the dump’s no-scavenging policy, had the donations buried.
“I think basic human decency, common sense, took a back seat to procedure. Procedure was followed to the letter – bury the load instead of somebody standing up and saying, ‘Wait, stop, something’s wrong here,’ ” he said.
Search
Recently Active...
Comments
Wolfie
Posted on: 08/11/2011 12:19
LB - Thank You for sharing this, I have many times wondered about such things and if they happened. How many times has this happened and we never heard about it? I don't mean Slave Lake itself, but other donations to aid relief?
It is indeed sad to hear (Read) about something like this, especially when people think the things they donated and sent actually reached the people they were intended for only to find out that possibly their effort was for nothing and it was toss into the trash without a thought.
I agree, No knee jerk reactions to things, Let the main agencies, (even though many times they step over each other neither knowing what the other is doing) deal with the Immediate up front response. Then follow up with what ever may be still needed, after that. Hopefully something like this can be avoided in the future. I understand the no scavenging policy from this landfill site. However, I think that in a situation like this where it was clearly marked items. That a possible exception could be made if these are meant as aid to people.
But, again, it's the by-law. People will then say well, you bent the rule for so n so, why not bend it for us? Potential for abuse. Even if I personally would have said yes take the items to where they need to be, not the landfill.
*Peace - Love - Respect* Unconditionally
Wolfie
LBmuskoka
Posted on: 08/12/2011 05:49
Kind Wolfie, I would like to agree with all you write, but in this case I must beg to differ.
Following procedures for the sake of procedure, particularly when the procedure is counter productive to the true process - ie filling landfills with "new" items - is, I'm sorry but I can't think of any other words.... just plain stupid.
We are hamstringing our society and communities with regulations that are destroying our ability to use good old fashioned common sense. In this particular case, the irony of waste is screaming.
LB
------------------------
Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Wolfie
Posted on: 08/12/2011 10:09
LB - We are not at differences you and I.
I agree with you 100% I personally think that those things should have been taken out of the land fill and given to the people it was intended for from the start. That is why I said the items that were clearly marked for aid to these people should have been allowed to be removed from the landfill and reach their final destination. They should never have been put there to begin with.
I was trying to show how the hands of the landfill owners hands were tied by the law. So even if they wanted to they are forbidden. I'm all for keeping stuff out of landfills and dumps if at all possible.
*Peace - Love - Respect* Unconditionally
Wolfie
GordW
Posted on: 08/12/2011 21:00
Or maybe the items should have been re-purposed for others who did need then if teh need in SLave Lake was not there?
This is one of the problems with giving "Stuff". You have to find a way to transport and store it.
DKS
Posted on: 08/12/2011 21:15
This is nothing new. Back in the 90's, during one of the bad hurricanes to hit Florida, a lot of 'stuff" was collected in my community. This was in the early days of the internet. I was hearing from colleagues in Florida that donations were already sitting in fields getting soaked. I wrote to the newspapers, asking that people send money. I took a huge amount of heat, personally and professionally, for daring to make such a suggestion. I still believe I was right and I still do. Money, not 'stuff" is far more effective in any disaster.
Now should the 'stuff" be removed from the dump? Nope. Health reasons, for one thing. I take my garbage to the dump. You don't want to see what goes in. Once it's there, leave it there.
LBmuskoka
Posted on: 08/13/2011 06:11
DKS, you have my support regarding money donations. It is a more effective method of providing for direct need.
Sadly, I think, many in our world today have been swayed by the reports of wasteful spending not directed at those in need, ie imbalance between monies spent on admin instead of the needy. As a result, those who wish to give believe the tangible object will reach the target.
This particular incident was clearly an example of "good intentions". The intent was positive but the implementation was bad. It highlights the desire of people to give but a need for better organization with distribution.
In a broader sense it is an example of an inability for groups to work together, to abandon the focussed interest to see the broader picture and the very real need for flexibility in a state of crisis. Those items tossed in the landfill would have been used by a myriad of other needy individuals in this country if only the focus had been wider and people less rigid.
LB
--------------------
It is not good enough for things to be planned - they still have to be done; for the intention to become a reality, energy has to be launched into operation.
Walt Kelly