The+Trash+at+Flat+Rock+Brook

toc

= __**Abstract**:__ = = = Human behavior is impacting the appreciation of the natural beauty of parks. People visiting parks have been found to have a lack of respect for the environment and the aesthetics of the beauty of nature. Three parks in Bergen County, New Jersey- Overpeck, Flat Rock, and the Nature Sanctuary of Dwight Englewood were selected for analysis in an effort to determine the trash levels of different items throughout a period of seven months. Observational data was collected to determine which park was the worst maintained and the effect of people’s habits on trash disposal. Results showed that Overpeck Park was the least well maintained, the Nature Sanctuary showed the least amount of trash, and Flat Rock’s level were middle range proving the hypothesis that was tested.

= __**Background:**__ =

Before we began to work on our project, we had to learn a bit about our issue. We wanted to learn something about what caused littering, and why people littered. We found this information in Francis McAndrew's __Environmental Psychology.__ In this book we learned about why people litter. According to McAndrew, the "presence of other litter" is a huge reason for people to contribute to the problem. Another reason is the inconvenience of having to properly dispose of the trash. A third reason is that most people are ignorant as to how they are affecting the environment. By learning a bit about why people litter, we were able to decide where else we would take sample data from. We thought that since Overpeck was a big open area with no trashcans in the center, that it would be a favorable place for people who are too lazy to find a trashcan, and who will be influenced by other trash around them.

= __**Hypothesis:**__ =

In comparing 3 different sites, Flat Rock Brook, Overpeck County Park, and our Nature Sanctuary, there will be differences in trash levels between the 3 sites. At Flat Rock Brook, trash levels will be low throughout the watershed, although there are no trashcans on the trails. At our own Nature Sanctuary, there will be even less trash, despite not having trashcans, because fewer people use it, and it is also much smaller. Finally, at Overpeck park, there will be a lot more trash, because it is less well maintained, despite having trashcans all around the park.

=__** Procedure: **__=

1) Go to a certain destination such as Flat Rock. 2) Search a specific trail or place at the destination for trash. 3) Analyze where it came from and why it came from there. 4) Draw conclusions about where it came from and why it came from there. 5) Continue steps 1-4 for the other destinations such as OverPeck and the Nature Sanctuary. 6) Compare results from each place. 7) Draw conclusions to why there are differences or similarities.

So, when we put that into actual motion, we went to a park (i.e. Flat Rock). When we got there, we would walk through the different trails, and simply search the area for pieces of trash. As we found anything, we would write down what it was. After spending time at the park and jotting down our notes, we would go and try to figure out why it was there (refer to our background). Then, we would go to the other two parks and repeat that procedure, once every other month, on Fridays, between 4-6. Anything we found was picked up, and then properly disposed of. Then we would compare results from each of the parks, and make conclusions about the data we found.







= __**Materials:**__ =

1) Sony Camera 2) Magellan explorer 400 GPS 3) Trash Bag, to collect trash 4) Binoculars 5) Notebook 6) Metal Trash Picker-Uper (Metal Pole with Spike)

This is Flat Rock Brook, a park that covers 150 acres of land.

The circled area is the section that Mathews and I looked at in Overpeck County Park. Although smaller in size than Flat Rock Brook, Overpeck had a lot more pieces of trash then Flat Rock has.



= __**Results:**__  =

Throughout the time we worked to get information, we saw certain trends that lead us to our conclusion. Below are the graphs displaying the results we found.

These are the results from the Nature Sanctuary from the two times we went.



Below are the graphs showing what we found at Overpeck Park.















And finally, these are the results from Flat Rock Brook













=__ **Conclusion:** __= = = When comparing the trash levels at all three parks, it was confirmed that Overpeck Park had much greater amounts of trash throughout the park then both the Nature Sanctuary and Flat Rock Brook. Our final graph, shown immediately above, gives a great representation of the trash levels found in the parks. Overpeck Park had an overwhelming majority of the trash. It is clear that our hypothesis was proven by the data where one can see that Overpeck has clearly been less well maintained than the other two sites we studied. This shows that this park needs to be better taken care of and is in need of more supervision. Without it, there will continue to be huge numbers of trash in the park. If such a small park as this can amass such a huge number of pollution, then people must be wary of the dangers that they are causing to the environment. In Conclusion, it is clear that human impact on local parks will have a great effect on both their appearance and on their environmental well being. = __**Possible Sources of Error**__: =

Our main possible source of error is that we simply missed pieces of trash on our excursions to the different sites. This is the only error that we see possible.

= __References:__ =

Francis McAndrew's //Environmental Psychology http://www.flatrockbrook.org/// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Litter**