Ah, but the problem is that Mr Joe Littleguy is a lot easier to regulate than Mr Big Industry Lobbiest. Now of course their are only about 0.1% as many folks doing chemical based photography, but that never did stop the lawmakers from doing their thing. In fact they like it because they are not going to loose enough votes to hurt.
Reason and logic have nothing to do with law. Scott Loveless wrote: > Rebekah wrote: >>> So, I guess the best thing is to talk to a local lab (mini or >>> otherwise) and see if they'll take the used fix for proper disposal >>> according to whatever the local law is. >>> >> Thanks, I'll see if anyone around here will take it :o) >> >> rg2 >> >> >> > I think you guys are over-reacting. These photo chemicals that we buy > at the local camera shop are formulated so that J. Random Photographer > gets decent results with tap water. If a handful of photographers are > developing a few rolls a week, they're not going to hurt a damn thing. > We're not talking about a commercial lab. We're talking about one > person dumping twenty ounces of chemical that contains a very tiny > amount of silver down the drain. YOU DO MORE DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT > EVERY TIME YOU START YOUR CAR THAN YOU'LL DO IN A WEEK'S WORTH OF > PROCESSING. > > Excuse me while I go pee in the river. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
