Dumping in the Santa Monica Mountains

In the Santa Monica Mountains, there is evidence of illegal dumping that includes bottles, car parts, paint cans, household items, and construction trash such as lumber and roofing scraps. The trash observed at different sites along the roads and trails that run through the hills indicate that people have been dumping trash in the mountains for decades, with the majority of it likely coming from households who are not recycling. Given that people who use the roads and trails for transportation and recreation likely do not want trash on their roads, and littering and illegal dumping are activities that are both illegal and socially unacceptable, the presence of trash and debris in the Santa Monica Mountains begs the question about who is dumping the trash and why. By analyzing some of the contents and making observations about the area, it is possible to conclude that the trash is being dumped mostly by people who are not using or do not have access to traditional or acceptable methods of waste disposal.

Three areas were chosen for observation. Each area measured four square feet (two by two) and was located along the Mulholland Highway outside of Cornell, California. The contents of each dump site were arranged according to several types: kitchen and food items, makeup, beverage containers, and hazardous or industrial waste, including car parts and poison. The majority of the trash collected was common household trash, and beverage containers for both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks were the most common. Most items were either glass, ceramic, or metal, indicating that paper products were likely weathered and destroyed. Evidence of large items remains, including car parts, pieces of an old piano, and parts to a sink. This indicates that these sites might have been occasionally used for large items, though nothing exceptionally large was found during the observations. The presence of paint, batteries, and other toxic chemicals at the site indicates that people chose to dump trash instead of finding the acceptable method of disposal. Of all the dump sites, Dump Area B had the most large-item or industrial waste, though it was also the least filled. Dump Areas A and C were predominantly filled with household trash.

Nothing was found that indicated the names or other indisputable demographic data that could more accurately identify the people who had used the dump sites; however, based on the materials found at the dump sites, it is possible to hypothesize a few different types of people who might be responsible and reasons why. First, because the road is not widely used for inter- or intrastate travel, it is unlikely that trash was deposited by people who live significantly far from the dump sites, meaning these are likely members of the local and immediately surrounding communities. Secondly, the majority of the trash found was consumer household trash. This means that it is unlikely that businesses are using these sites to dump. Finally, the fact that half of the bottles and cans observed were for alcohol indicates that the sites might be frequented by people who are drinking or have recently drank alcohol. Reasons why people might use this dump site probably include either not having access to proper facilities or being unable or unwilling to pay for those services. There is no observable social good that comes from the dumping, and in fact the presence of toxic chemicals creates an environmental danger, so the people using these sites are either unaware or unconcerned with the impact of dumping.

In order to determine more about who might be using these illegal dump sites, more research should be conducted to determine the access to and use of proper trash removal and storage sites. More observations should be held over a period of time to assess the frequency of dumping. It would also be useful to look at the civic response to these dump sites over the years, especially if citizen groups or governmental agencies attempted to understand or solve the problem.