Municipal housecleaning

Part 37

Chapter 371,947 wordsPublic domain

─────────────┬───────────┬─────────────────────────┬────────────── Name │ Annual │Net Cost of Disposal[53] │ Net Profit │ Revenue │ │ │ from By- │ │ │ Products │ │ │ │ │ │ ├─────────┬───────────────┤ │ │ Per Ton │ Year │ ─────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼───────────────┼────────────── New York │ │ │ │$112,500 a yr. City[54] │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Buffalo │ │ $1.25│ │ │ │ │ │ Rochester │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Albany │ │ │ │ Binghamton │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Schenectady │ $3,000.00│ 10.23│ $34,200.00│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Syracuse │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Troy │ │ │ │ Yonkers │ │ 1.40│ 3,880.50│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Utica │ │ │ 4,100.00│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ New Rochelle │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Watertown │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Auburn │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Beacon │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Mechanicville│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Dunkirk │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Saratoga │ │ │ │ Middletown │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Kingston │ │ │ │ Jamestown │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Fulton │ │ │ 600.00│ │ │ │ │ Port Jervis │ │ │ 960.00[55]│ Elmira │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Salamanca │ │ │ │ Rome │ │ │ │ Niagara Falls│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Cortland │ │ │ 200.00[56]│ Cohoes │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Plattsburgh │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Ithaca │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Olean │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Johnstown │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Ogdensburg │ │ │ │ Gloversville │ │ │ │ Hudson │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Little Falls │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ North │ │ │ │ Tonawanda │ │ │ │ Newburgh │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Norwich │ │ │ │ Mount Vernon │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lockport │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Hornell │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Rensselaer │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Batavia │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Tonawanda │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Corning │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Oswego │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Canandaigua │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Borough of │ │ │ │ Queens │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Amsterdam │ │ │ │ Poughkeepsie │ │ │ │ Atlanta, Ga. │ None.│ [59] │ [59] │ [59] │ │ │ │ Columbus, │ $66,772.35│ │ │$1.226 per ton Ohio │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Cincinnati, │ $10,000.00│$1.26[60]│ │ O. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Milwaukee, │ │ │ │ Wis. │ │ │ │ Detroit, │ │ City pays nothing. │ Mich. │ │ │ │ │ │ Washington, │ │$2.31[61]│ │ $1.89 per D. C. │ │ │ │ ton[62] St. Louis, │ │ .87[63]│ │ Mo. │ │ │ │ Lawrence, │ │ │ │ $1.25 a load. Mass. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ New Orleans, │ │ │ │ La. │ │ │ │ Hartford, │ │ │ │ Conn. │ │ │ │ Baltimore, │ │ │ 68,000.00[64]│ Md. │ │ │ │ Bridgeport, │ │ 50[64]│ │ Conn │ │ │ │ Cleveland, O.│$195,000.00│ │ │$1.49½ per ton │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lowell, Mass.│ │ │ │ $5,919.77 Cambridge, │ │ │ │$15,000.00[65] Mass. │ │ │ │ Louisville, │ │ │ │ Ky. │ │ │ │ Pittsburgh, │ │ $2.25│ $290,000.00│ Pa. │ │ │ │ Denver, Col. │ │ Free.│ │ Savannah, Ga.│ │ .36│ │ │ │ │ │ Chicago, Ill.│ │ │ $144,744.00│ │ │ │ │ Kansas City, │ │ │ │ Mo. │ │ │ │ Boston, Mass.│ │ │$925,318.56[66]│ Lynn, Mass. │ │ │ │ Grand Rapids,│ │ │ │ 45¢ per ton. Mich. │ │ │ │ Minneapolis, │ $27,000.00│ .85│ $16,000.00│ Minn. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ St. Paul, │ │ │ │ 80¢ per ton. Minn. │ │ │ │ Jersey City, │ │ │ │ N. J. │ │ │ │ Passaic, N. │ │ │ │ J. │ │ │ │ Paterson, N. │ │ .877[67]│ $9,527.42│ $1.18 J. │ │ │ │ Trenton, N. │ │ .48[69]│ $7,108.37[69]│ J. │ │ │ │ Dayton, O. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Providence, │ │ │ │ R. I. │ │ │ │ Charleston, │ │ │ │ S. C. │ │ │ │ Nashville, │ │ │ │ Tenn. │ │ │ │ Seattle, │ │ │ │ Wash. │ │ │ │ Spokane, │ $5.00│ .60│ │ Wash. │ │ │ │ Oakland, Cal.│ │ .60│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ New Bedford, │ │ │ $25,500.00│ Mass. │ │ │ │ Springfield, │ │ [68] │ [68] │ [68] Mass. │ │ │ │ Portland, │ 34[56] per│ .34[69]│ │ Ore. │ ton.│ │ │ Philadelphia,│ │ │ │ Pa. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Scranton, Pa.│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Reading, Pa. │ $1.00[70]│ │ │ Richmond, Va.│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Los Angeles, │ │ │ │ 51¢ per ton Cal. │ │ │ │for reduction, │ │ │ │ $1 for │ │ │ │ feeding. San │ │ .60[71]│ │ Francisco, │ │ │ │ Cal. │ │ │ │ Newark, N. J.│ │ │ │ Indianapolis,│ │ │ │ Ind. │ │ │ │ Toledo, O. │ │ │ │ Worcester, │ $38,838.67│ │ │ Mass. │ │ │ │ New Haven, │ │ │ │ Conn. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Birmingham, │ │ │ │ Ala. │ │ │ │ Memphis, │ │ │ │ Tenn. │ │ │ │ Omaha, Neb. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Fall River, │ │ No│ │ Mass. │ │ expense.│ │ ─────────────┴───────────┴─────────┴───────────────┴──────────────

Glens Falls and Oneonta, N. Y., report that they have no systems.

Footnote 53:

A Includes interest, depreciation, maintenance and repair charges.

Footnote 54:

Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn Boroughs only.

Footnote 55:

Collection and disposal.

Footnote 56:

No cost for superintendence, man receiving salable rubbish for his pay.

Footnote 57:

Eight-hour capacity.

Footnote 58:

Includes maintenance and repair charges, and is for crematories only.

Footnote 59:

Plant not yet under control of city, court action pending.

Footnote 60:

Labor and supply.

Footnote 61:

Gross.

Footnote 62:

Estimated.

Footnote 63:

Contract price.

Footnote 64:

Price paid by city.

Footnote 65:

City sells for 70¢ per cord ft.

Footnote 66:

Includes collection.

Footnote 67:

Labor only.

Footnote 68:

City may buy plant at end of ten years for $50,000, at end of twenty years it becomes property of city free of cost.

Footnote 69:

Does not include interest and depreciation.

Footnote 70:

Fuel and wages.

Footnote 71:

Price paid reduction company by scavengers.

Footnote 72:

Guaranteed.

CARE AND DISPOSAL OF MANURE REGULATIONS IN MANY AMERICAN CITIES—PROVISIONS FOR STORING AND REMOVING THE WASTE—CARE OF STABLES

Some cities have made very stringent regulations for the care, collection and disposal of stable manure within their limits; others are not so exacting and many have not as yet given any thought to the subject, or if they have no municipal laws have been enacted. The importance of municipal regulation is recognized by all sanitarians, and especially since the house fly has been regarded as one of the chief spreaders of disease. If for no other reason than to eliminate the greatest breeding place of the fly, stable manure should be properly cared for, and stables and other places where animals are kept in cities should be clean.

The regulations of most cities require the individual to dispose of the manure on the premises he owns or occupies. Only a few cities have a municipal collection system or have the work done under contract. In those cities where gardeners and farmers are permitted to collect the waste voluntarily no trouble has been experienced during the winter months when the farmer is not busy on the soil, but during the spring and summer, when the need of cleanliness is greatest, but when the farmer is too busy planting and harvesting, the collection is neglected. Minneapolis is one of the cities which have suffered in this way. In several cities one or more companies deal in manure, maintaining wagons exclusively for collection purposes. The manure is carted either to the railroad direct for shipment or to persons purchasing it. In most instances these companies pay a small amount for the manure. The stable manure in Washington is collected and disposed of in this manner. Toronto, Canada, contracts with four different companies to remove the manure. These make a nominal charge for the collection, the city being under no expense. In Jersey City the waste is carted away by private contractors and most of it is sold to farmers. Denver transfers its stable manure to the city dump where it is hid during the summer months and in the spring is sold to gardeners. The city sanitary inspector does not regard this plan as satisfactory.

There seems to be an unanimity of opinion among most municipal sanitarians that the city itself should be prepared to remove manure when owners or occupants fail or refuse to do so. Every owner should be allowed to sell it if he can; otherwise, it should be regarded as a nuisance, and the city should remove it without compensating the owner, but charging him for the service. Unquestionably as cities continue to grow and as congestion becomes greater such a plan will be adopted by most municipalities.

One of the best systems in operation is that in Columbus, Ohio, where manure is collected by municipal employees from any stable within the city limits. The Columbus ordinance provides that any person desiring to have the manure removed must take out a permit for such service at a yearly charge of $3 for one horse, $5 for two horses and $1 for each additional horse. After the ordinance became a law the Department of Public Safety began to notify the public that from and after April 1, 1912, no manure would be removed without the payment of a fee.

Between September 1 and June 1 the demand for manure is greatly in excess of the supply and the city could sell three or four times as much as it collects. During the remainder of the year there is practically no demand for the waste as farmers cannot handle it.

The collection is made under the following rules: Whenever a person pays to the city treasury the ordinance charge for manure collection the Department of Public Service is notified on a blank form. The name, address, permit number, and number of horses are recorded in alphabetical order. To each of the four drivers employed in collection is given a separate list of barns from which to collect, and each evening he reports the places from which he made collection during the day.

Following is a detailed statement of the cost of collection and the receipts from the sale of manure for 1916 when prices were normal:

Total number of loads hauled 1486 Total number of tons collected 2972

_Expenses_

Teams and labor $2,689.25 Superintendent, inspection, etc. 200.21 Repairs, etc. 546.49

_Receipts_

Sale of manure $2,029.50 Receipts from citizens for collection 672.00 Cash on hand 15.00 Open account on books for year 148.00 Net cost 739.90 Cost of collection per load 2.31 Cost of collection per load less receipts .49 Cost of collection per ton less receipts .24½

The Civil Engineer of the Columbus Health Department says that a market has been found for the entire output of the city, the prevailing price being $2 a wagon load delivered anywhere inside the city limits, and for shipment $15 per average car f. o. b. cars, city loading station. He further says that about 15 per cent. of the manure produced in Columbus, a city of 200,000 inhabitants, is collected. “It seems,” he says, “perfectly possible to collect all manure produced in the city at a very low cost to the municipality, for during the year 1913 only three 2-ton wagons were used in manure collection and they proved to be sufficient to handle the work with ease.”

In Chicago manure must be removed every seventy-two hours and collected by licensed scavengers at the expense of the stable owner. Only during the last two or three years was specific authority over stables granted to the Health Department, which immediately began an inspection of all stables. Of the first 500 inspected it was found that from a sanitary standpoint they were in very poor condition.

An example of stringent regulations in a large city is the ordinance adopted by New York City. It follows:

“No manure vault, pit or bin shall be allowed upon the premises used for stabling purposes, except upon premises used for barning in unimproved sections of the city. All manure and stable refuse shall be kept within the stable and removed daily, or if not removed daily shall be pressed into bales or barrels adequately screened or otherwise protected or covered so that flies cannot have access thereto, or otherwise treated as approved by the Department of Health. All such manure or stable refuse so baled, barreled or treated, shall be removed from stables at least twice weekly.

“The loading of manure for removal shall be done within the stable without causing a nuisance.

“No person shall engage in the business of transporting manure or drive any cart for that purpose, in the City of New York, without a permit therefor issued by the Board of Health or otherwise than in accordance with the terms of said permit and with the regulations of said board.

“The permit issued by the Board of Health shall be securely fastened in a conspicuous place, on the right side near the front of the vehicle used in the transportation of offensive materials. Vehicles used in the transportation of offensive materials while loaded, either wholly or in part, shall not remain on the street or place any unreasonable length of time, and shall not, except when unavoidable, stop in front of any premises other than those from which material is being collected.

“All vehicles and contents therein shall be thoroughly cleaned upon the completion of a day’s use, and so stored as not to cause a nuisance.

“Manure may be transported to a dump operated under a permit issued by the Department of Health or to firms in the unimproved sections of the city, or to points outside the city of New York. Every vehicle used in transporting manure shall be tight and provided with a suitable cover so as to prevent the dropping of manure upon the streets; if the cover be of canvas or of other similar material, it shall be of sufficient size completely to cover the manure within the vehicle and shall be securely fastened on all sides of the vehicle.

“No vehicle engaged in the transportation of manure shall be permitted to load upon the sidewalk, in the alleyway, in the yard or any place except the stable.”

For a small city the ordinance of Newburgh, New York, contains several good suggestions. It is as follows: