I wish to address a number of points in the Bulletin’s Jan. 13 article, “Select Board adopts ‘zero-waste community’ plan.” They convey mistaken impressions about the Select Board’s action at its Jan. 9 meeting, the content of the solid waste master plan submitted by the Recycling and Refuse Management Committee (RRMC), and the goals of the RRMC.

The Select Board did not adopt a zero-waste plan at this meeting. Rather, the solid waste master plan was accepted for consideration, and the town is now committed to creating a zero-waste plan to address solid waste management issues with input from all agencies and sectors of the community.

In addition, the solid waste master plan does not “push Amherst toward the goal of being what is known as a zero-waste community.” It does recommend that the town enforce existing state and town regulations, including the requirement that refuse contain no more than 5 percent by volume of recyclable paper products and containers.

However, the RRMC regards public education as a much more effective approach than “pushing” people and institutions to move toward zero waste, and is inviting public participation in launching a public education campaign to promote the responsible management of resources in our town.

The article states that a zero-waste community accomplishes its goals by “increasing recycling and ensuring food waste is collected.” Separating recyclables does reduce pollution and resource depletion, and curbside collection of organics such as food waste and nonrecyclable paper products is a priority for waste reduction in Amherst.

Recycling, however, is the least important of the familiar “Three R’s” mantra: “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.” Almost half of total greenhouse gas emissions are caused by production and manufacture of food and non-food consumer items. Buying less, fixing things that can be repaired, purchasing items secondhand, and donating reusable items are far more important than recycling in preserving natural resources and reducing our environmental impact.

Also, I am quoted as saying that “hiring a coordinator to oversee the implementation of the master plan” is “a priority.” The solid waste master plan did advocate the creation of a full-time waste management coordinator position because the RRMC believed that a salaried professional would likely be necessary for the goals of a zero-waste plan to be achieved.

However, this position is not funded in the current town budget, and Town Manager Paul Bockelman has indicated that these responsibilities could be prioritized and delegated to current staff.

Furthermore, the article incorrectly states that a $50,000 grant recently awarded by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection for a temporary 18-month to two-year waste management coordinator position in Amherst represents “half of the salary” of this position. In reality, the conditions of the grant only require a 25 percent (not 100 percent) match of the amount awarded.

Also, the coordinator would not “oversee the implementation of the master plan.” The sole focus of this temporary position would be to enforce Board of Health regulations.

Finally, the article conveys the impression that the RRMC advocates “cutting down on the number of private (trash and recycling) haulers.” Currently, three haulers make multiple trips throughout each residential neighborhood collecting refuse and recyclables, creating unnecessary noise, pollution, and wear and tear on town roads.

The RRMC does recommend transitioning to a single-hauler system administered by the town in order to expand our options for waste management. However, we are hopeful that haulers currently operating in Amherst could collectively function as a single hauler in order to allow them to continue to serve our neighborhoods in providing refuse collection.

John Root is chairman of the Recycling and Refuse Management Committee in Amherst.