November/December 1995
|
|
November/December 1995 |
by Frank Bevacqua
Many voices were heard during the public hearings, workshops and local community visits at the Biennial Meeting on Great Lakes Water Quality, held September 22-25, 1995. Despite the diversity of views among the 1,800 participants at the twin ports of Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin, a number of common themes were sounded.
After releasing reports by its advisory boards, the International Joint Commission held its biennial meeting to receive input from the public. The input will be considered as the Commission prepares its biennial report assessing progress by Governments of the United States and Canada under their 1978 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
Many biennial meeting participants celebrated the progress that has resulted from cooperation under the Agreement since the days when untreated sewage and industrial wastes poured into the lakes. As for the priorities still to be addressed, ridding the waters of toxic chemicals, stopping the loss of fish and wildlife habitat and preventing more invasions by exotic species topped many participants' lists.
The close connection between environmental and economic decisions also was a recurring theme. Some felt more effort was needed to identify priority risks, while others thought the focus should be on helping workers and communities with the transition to a clean economy.
Connections between the Great Lakes basin and the rest of the world, both through commerce and the atmosphere, were also emphasized. Various agency representatives said they must address persistent toxics in the Great Lakes at the national and global levels. "We are committed to doing that," stated Robert Perciasepe, assistant administrator for water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).
Native American/First Nations representatives stated that the reason we face pollution problems is because the European-based culture has failed to recognize that the land and water themselves have a soul. They said the tribes must be full partners in Great Lakes decisionmaking and with funding support. The cost of not doing so, according to Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Executive Administrator James Schlender, "is to lose the participation of governments with substantial jurisdiction as well as the cultural and historical tradition of living in harmony with the environment."
A major focus of the meeting was the 1991 commitment by federal, state and provincial governments to make Lake Superior a demonstration area for zero discharge of persistent toxic substances. Citizens and agency representatives alike urged governments to make good on that pledge.
"We have the mandate, and have embraced it in multistakeholder forums," said Laura Rose Day of the environmental nongovernment organizations. "It's time to get on with it." In his keynote address, Perciasepe challenged participants of the Binational Lake Superior Program to "move from the planning to the action stage."
"But will the Governments set a target date to achieve zero discharge of substances of concern in Lake Superior?" asked an audience member later in the proceedings.
U.S. EPA Region 5 Administrator Val Adamkus replied, "We are going to continue working so that, maybe during the next biennial meeting, we could tell you we will probably achieve what we are all waiting for by a specific date."
Achievements by industry to reduce discharges to the region's water and air, recycle materials, save energy and produce less waste were recounted by Catherine Cobden on behalf of the Council of Great Lakes Industries. "As a result of changes in the bleaching process in the pulp and paper industry," stated Cobden, "dioxin discharges have been virtually eliminated."
In the production of particle board and hardwood, new processes have reduced formaldehyde emissions by over 80 percent compared with the 1970s. Currently in the United States, one of every two newspapers is recovered, and recycled and steel in new cars is approximately 43 percent recycled, Cobden said.
John Mills, director general of Environment Canada's Ontario Region, highlighted conclusions in the Governments of the United States and Canada's joint State of the Great Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC) report. One key concern is that certain chemicals mimic hormones in fish and wildlife and have the potential to do the same in humans. "Exposure to environmental levels of hormone-mimickers has been implicated in developmental abnormalities, such as demasculinization and feminization, decreased fertilization, decreased hatching success, birth deformities, thyroid dysfunction and altered immune system function," according to Mills.
But Dr. Ilene Danse, a toxicologist who spoke with the Council of Great Lakes Industries, attempted to portray hormone disruption as a marginal threat to human health by equating naturally-occurring compounds with manmade pollutants. Noting that one serving of broccoli has 1,500 times the effective dose of hormonelike substances than does the U.S. EPA reference dose of dioxin, she said, "I think we need to keep these things in perspective when we're looking at enforcing regulation."
With regard to the health of fish and wildlife, Environment Canada's Mills said that SOLEC concludes that habitat destruction, invasions by exotics and loss of native species have been a "far greater stress" than toxic pollution. "In the past two centuries, approximately 80 percent of the coastal wetlands have been lost in the lower Great Lakes and loss continues at an unacceptable rate," according to Mills.
John Manty, on behalf of the environmental nongovernment organizations, expressed concern over proposals in the U.S. Congress to remove legal protection for 66 to 80 percent of remaining Great Lakes wetlands and for endangered species. "The health of the Great Lakes ecosystem is under an unprecedented threat as the Governments of the United States and Canada seek to roll back decades worth of basic conservation law," asserted Manty.
The effect of environmental regulation on the economy was also a recurring theme. U.S. EPA's Perciasepe said he would strive to provide both the regulated community and the states, tribes and local governments, the regulatory flexibility to explore new and innovative approaches to pollution prevention and control.
The Council of Great Lakes Industries emphasized the need to clariry risks and to require spending where it will do the most good.
Labor representatives focused on the threats of job loss related to changing production processes and the social consequences. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers' representative Les Leopold pointed to research findings that unemployed workers suffered damage to their immune functions "not unlike that caused by dioxin."
Leopold did not blame environmental regulation for job loss, but rather multinational corporations, which "flee" to low wage and low regulatory areas of the globe. However, he proposed that, "A just transition program would provide one realistic path for working people to begin to embrace the elimination of toxic substances instead of fearing it."
Environmental nongovernment organizations (ENGOs) also called on the Commission and governments to plan for an orderly transition before it is too late. "We don't want to trade an environmental crisis for a social and economic crisis," said ENGO representative Jack Weinberg. Radionuclides were also characterized as the most persistent of the poisons that we routinely dump into the Great Lakes. "It is necessary for the survival of life on earth that we phase out the nuclear industry as soon as possible," stated Kathleen Brosemer on behalf of the ENGOs.
The contingent of youth and educators helped to keep discussions focused on the future. Carl Rothfells, grade 13 student from Sutton District High School north of Toronto, asked participants to close their eyes and imagine what the Great Lakes would look like if they had the power to bring about needed change. "Now open your eyes and ask yourself, what have you done to achieve that vision? What are you going to do?"
The Commission is currently preparing its Eighth Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality for release in early 1996. To request a copy, contact a Commission office.
Sommaire
Beaucoup de personnes ont fait entendre leurs voix pendant les visites dans des collectivités, les audiences publiques et les ateliers de travail de la Réunion biennale sur la qualité de l'eau dans les Grands Lacs et le Saint-Laurent, qui s'est tenue du 22 au 25 septembre 1995. Malgré la diversité des opinions émises par les 1800 participants rassemblés dans les ports jumeaux de Duluth, Minnesota, et de Superior, Wisconsin, de nombreuses constantes sont apparues.
Après la diffusion des rapports rédigés par ses Conseils consultatifs, la Commission mixte internationale tient sa réunion biennale pour recueillir les commentaires de la population. Elle rédige ensuite son propre rapport biennal qui lui sert à évaluer les progrès des gouvernements du Canada et des États-Unis au regard de l'Accord de 1978 relatif à la qualité de l'eau des Grands Lacs.
Bon nombre de participants ont vanté les progrès accomplis grâce à la collaboration dans laquelle se sont engagés les deux gouvernements, en vertu de cet Accord, depuis le temps où des eaux d'égout brutes et des déchets industriels étaient déversés dans les Grands Lacs. L'élimination des composés chimiques toxiques dans l'eau, l'enraiement de la perte d'habitats du poisson et de la faune et la prévention de toute nouvelle invasion par des espèces exotiques sont les problèmes restants jugés par plusieurs être d'intérêt prioritaire.
Il a aussi été question des liens réunissant le bassin des Grands Lacs au reste du monde, que ce soit par la voie du commerce ou de l'atmosphère. Différents représentants d'organismes gouvernementaux ont dit qu'ils doivent s'attaquer, à l'échelle nationale comme à l'échelle mondiale, aux composés chimiques toxiques persistants qui polluent les Grands Lacs. «Nous avons pris un engagement formel», de dire Robert Perciasepe, administrateur adjoint pour l'eau, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).
Les liens étroits entre les décisions d'ordre économique et les décisions d'ordre environnemental ont constitué un thème souvent évoqué. Certaines personnes pensent qu'il faut mettre davantage d'énergie dans la détermination des risques les plus graves, d'autres pensent qu'on devrait mettre l'accent sur l'aide à apporter aux travailleurs et aux collectivités pénalisés par la conversion à une économie non polluante.
Les représentants des premières nations ont déclaré qu'il nous faut régler les problèmes de pollution parce que la culture blanche n'a pas su reconnaître que la terre et l'eau ont une âme. Ils affirment aussi que les tribus doivent participer pleinement aux décisions relatives aux Grands Lacs et qu'elles doivent obtenir des subventions de soutien. Le coût à payer pour ne pas agir de la sorte, selon James Schlender, administrateur de haute direction de la Commission indienne pour le poisson et la faune des Grands Lacs, est «de perdre la collaboration de gouvernements ayant d'importants pouvoirs juridictionnels et une tradition, sur le plan culturel et historique, d'harmonie avec la nature.»
Un sujet important de la rencontre fut l'engagement de 1991 pris par les gouvernements aux paliers fédéral, provincial et d'État, de faire du lac Supérieur une région de démonstration d'aucun rejet de substances toxiques persistantes. Les citoyens et les représentants des Agences ont vivement incité les gouvernements à respecter leurs engagements.
«Nous avons le mandat et nous l'avons reconnu lors des forums réunissant les intervenants», de dire Mme Laura Rose Day des organisations non gouvernementales de protection de l'environnement, «et il est temps de passer à l'action.» Dans son discours de présentation, M. Perciasepe de l'U.S. EPA a mis au défi les participants du Programme binational visant le rétablissement et la protection du lac Supérieur «de passer de la planification à l'action.»
Revised: March 14, 1997
Maintained by Kevin McGunagle,
mcgunaglek@ijc.wincom.net