Pennsylvania - Ban smoking at all state parks immediately

[Gary Triplett]

Pennsylvania's marvelous state parks make it easy for just about everyone in the commonwealth to experience the natural wonders of Penn's Woods. The 120-park system comes close to the late environmental champion Maurice K. Goddard's goal of having a state park within 25 miles of every residence.

Unfortunately, some park visitors treat the parks much as they treat the sidewalks and roadways of their towns - as ash trays.

Beyond the health risks and health care costs that smokers impose on others who are not addicted to nicotine is the particularly galling cost of cleaning up after them. Governments spend many millions of dollars each year picking up butts.

Many smoker/litterers believe that their cigarettes are biodegradeable. But filters are cellulose acetate, a plastic. And the filters, after they do their job, contain many toxic substances. They're not just litter; they are pellets of toxic waste.

This week the state Department of Natural Conservation and Resources announced that it will conduct a pilot program to ban all smoking at two state parks.

The DCNR has not yet selected the parks, but they will include bodies of water because smokers, naturally, throw their butts in streams and lakes (only you can prevent forest fires).

The DCNR should simply ban smoking at all state parks right now. Pennsylvania taxpayers have no obligation to accommodate smokers or to pick up their litter.

[Concerned]

Yes lets have the government tell us everything,How about you move youre anti everything attitude to a communist country you would fit right in.

[Frank Jenkins]

Lets ban camp fires after all during warm weather they are nothing more than a decoration that's polluting the air. Perhaps the maintenance at the parks should cease as well due to the destruction of natural habitat and pollution caused by such maintenance.

[carl]

Something in the nature of a moral busybody demands that they never quit they always find someone new to express their ignorance like a holy grail. It is not only repulsive for Governments to be funding lobby groups of this type who pass themselves off as charities, to promote intrusive legislation, it is an illegal act that demands incarceration. When a person is allowed to describe over 60 million people by such derogatory and slanderous descriptions, and it finds it's way into a paper; I have to say the editor needs to be scrutinized and his competence challenged. This little rant is far from unique, we see these paid advertisement, every time an outdoor smoking ban is proposed, the same ad agency crafted talking points the same lies and exaggerations. Although this piece suffers from a lack of conveniently molded statistics. Here is the one single statistic that exposes the author and the trash that was presented. With over 60 million people who smoke in the United States at this moment, which is slightly higher than the number who smoked 50 years ago, with only half the population, on average 20 cigarettes a day means that over 1.2 billion cigarettes are consumed every day and close to a half a trillion every year. The number of fires that result from smoking and the number of cigarette butts you find in the forest don't even exist by normal statistical evaluations. So imagine what we would see if half the trash in this article were actually true. The parks are a part of the "Hospitality industry" and that industry relies on serving the needs of all, not just the finger wags and fanatics, who, in reality we would likely be more comfortable in the parks, if they were the ones being turned away, or at least treated for their delusions. With a third the adult population smoking the loss of one third to one half of revenues that will follow this legislation, will have a devastating efferct on the opperations of any park or similasr venue. The only way to offset that loss is to do what the surviving bars were forced to do, in the face of identical bans on their properties, and raise the prices and with higher prices all that many more will not be able to afford the service and eventually that serviuce will become unsustainable. Is this the outcome we would like to chance? Or would it simply be more responsible and inteligent to allow smoiking and educate visitors to the rules, encouraging all people with existing laws that deal with litter. There is no support anywhere even among the "dedicated professionals" that smoking outdoors, when responsible people engage, causes harm to anyone, so the only argumant in favor of outdoor bans is a promotion of hatred and exclusions [leaving no stone unturned] don't buy what this bigot is selling we would do well without it. Focus instead on the origins of the article and lets deal with that payola scandal under the law. Millions paid to pick up cigarette butts and nothing else to do with their day? What is the official job description and is it illegal to jeopardize their employment, if you pick up after others, even if you are not being paid? Give us a break we as a community thrive when we work together as a whole and fail, when we live in isolation and promote this ghetto minded ignorance.

[luther]

Yeah, how about banning farting too while you are at it...it adds to global warming. And talking, when I am walking in the woods, others' voices disturb the silence that I seek. In fact, ban all human occupancy at state parks because the presence of humans ruin the wilderness. PA taxpayers have no obligation to pay for your health care or your unemployment or your contraception or the consequences of your sexual activity if you get aids or stds... Let's ban life all together only that will make some people happy.