In the House of Commons shortly after

oil spill debate opened. The consensus was
that the whole matter of oil shipment
through the three oceans bordering Can-
ada should forthwith come under review.

To pour oil on troubled waters is to
create disaster. The government had best
be mindful of this latter observation.

All agreed that oil spills at sea are disas-
trous to a degree almost beyond compre-
hension. There was also agreement that
properly enforced regulations would
greatly reduce the risk and frequency of oil
spills. The government disagreed that a
royal commission be set up to assist in the
formulation of such regulation and to take
an in-depth look of this whole question.
The government obviously fears that such
an inquiry might reveal its own ineptitude.

As a fisherman who has for over 20
years plied the waters of the west coast
from the mouth of the Columbia to the
Bering Sea, I.am familiar with the perils
that await shipping in these waters. I have
seen first hand the wrecks of modern ships
piled upon our shores and as many as 15
miles off course. Space does not permit
details nor does it permit detailed exami-
nation of the Exxon Valdez disaster, its
causes and its effects. So let’s get at the
more obvious, some of which appear to
have been deliberately obscured. Money
talks but it can also buy silence.

I picked up my pen to write this letter, the

Let protest over spill
echo round the world

A ship 300 metres long is unwieldy. Its
response to action from the bridge is tor-
tuously sluggish. Yet such a vessel was
allowed to leave Valdez harbour under the
command of a skipper alleged to have
been under the influence of alcohol and

-steered by an unqualified third mate.

A perfect set-up for scapegoating! But
get a load of this: the Exxon Valdez had to
thread its way through icebergs floating
just outside of the harbour and neither
escort vessels nor tugs were in attendance
nor was a qualified pilot on board. Such
negligence on the part of the shipping
company and on the part of the port
authority is criminal but this is the sort of
stuff that has been played down.

There are other facts pertinent to this
case that have filtered through the cracks.
This recently built monster ship is single
skinned. Some ships designed to transport
oil from the Gulf of Mexico up the Missis-
sippi are on the Alaska run. River boats! It
appears that regulations governing size,
construction, safety and use of oil tanks
are non-existent. I could go on, but I rest
my Case.

Now is the time for the public to get on
this one and set up a how! that will be
heard not only in Ottawa but clear around
the world.

Fred Pearson,
Comox

od

borne out by events.

Opponents warned of danger

More than 17 years ago, three bus loads
of women left Vancouver for Cherry
Point, Wash. where the American authori-
ties were building the docks for the oil to
be shipped down the west coast from
Alaska.

It was a protest movement by a wom-
an’s organization against the oil being
transported by sea along the west coast. I
was one of the women on the bus. We met
the authorities and tried to change their
decision, pointing out that hazards and
danger of transporting oil by sea. We were
unsuccessful.

Now we have barely cleaned up the last
spill off Washington state not knowing

1972 PROTEST AGAINST TANKER TRAFFIC ..

a a
. demonstrators’ predictions

what permanent damage has been made,
and we are faced with this disgraceful
tragedy of the Alaska oil spill.

We don’t yet the extent of damage to
the environment, including the caribou
runs, the fish, birds, marine life, foliage,
the life of the fishermen and the people
who live in the area.

Who is to blame? I feel the blame in
such an important issue as the destruction
of our environment falls on the shoulders.
of the elected government and we the
people will have to make sure they take the
responsibility.

Lillian Robson,
Vancouver

U.S. chemical lobby seen in mills’ dioxin pollution —

B.C. residents are on page one of a long
and costly lesson on the realities. of dioxin
contamination resulting from the kraft
bleaching process being utilized in B.C.
pulp and paper mills. There has been much
that has been hushed over the last two
decades but some of this is finally coming
into public focus.

Unlike what our provincial environment
minister, Bruce Strachan alleges, the scien-
tific community and government have long
been aware of the hazards of kraft bleach-
ing. Mills in other countries — even one
Canadian mill — converted to the highly
preferable oxygen bleaching method in the
‘70s. As E.B. Eddy Co. in Espanola, Onta-
rio will attest, it is cheaper to bleach pulp
using oxygen than by using chlorine gas.
Why then didn’t more mill, especially, the
six, large mills looming over the relatively
shallow and therefore more vulnerable,
Georgia Strait area in B.C., convert?

B.C. residents are on page one of a long
and painfully costly lesson on the realities of
the Canada-U.S. trade agreement. What
has long been true of Canadian vis-a-vis
American business interests is about to
become very graphic in terms of Canada’s
water resources. The predominant obstacle
to environmentally-sound, clean up and
conversion measures was the big. U.S. Dow
chemical lobby.

Dow sells chlorine gas and they’ll deny
the connection between 2378 TCDD — the
deadliest, man-made molecule that exists
— and the use of their product in the face of
the most overwhelming evidence. While
Europeans hastened to invest in pollution
abatement technology, Canadians obliv-
iously continued to do as they were told.

No one in the U.S. has to take responsi-
bility for medical costs in the regions they
help to pollute (tissue samples from B.C.
residents have been found to have much
higher levels of dioxin than those of other
Canadians — even than of those living
around the Great Lakes!) These “interests”

don’t have to compensate for losses in B.C.
fisheries, either,

To further illustrate this concern I’d like
to draw attention to the heavy use of chemi-
cal fertilizers in southwestern U.S. states.
Long term use of these fertilizers has left
high concentrations of salts and minerals in
that soil. The only way to keep this abused
soil useful is to flush it continuously with
amazing quantities of fresh water. Mean-
while, unbridled economic growth and in
some parts of the U.S., drought conditions,
are responsible for dwindling fresh water
resources.

There’s already a canal four hundreds

miles long taking water from the Sacra- »

mento River Valley to Southern California
swimming pools which dot the landscape,

sparkling turquoise and redolent of chlo-
rine. Let’s take a humanistic view of all this.
They don’t really need our water as much as
they need a change of lifestyle.

I grew up in B.C. in the 50’s and 60’s
when B.C.’s hydroelectric power was sold
to U.S. interests at bargain-basement prices.
I grew up hearing about how we couldn’t
raise the price a decade or so later when that
power became more valuable. After all, rib-
bons had been cut and paper had been

\ signed. ;

If we must put economic concerns ahead
of environmental concerns, why not go for

CELGAR PULP MILL..
chlorine bleaching.

the long-range, sound investment instead of
the fast buck. There’s real money and
power to be gained from our vast water
resources if we remain in control of them.
I recently heard that U.S: companies will
qualify for Western Diversification funds

. like others throughout province, it uses dioxin-producing

é = =

under the FTA. But that’s another matter.
Or is it?
The world’s longest undefended border,

indeed!
D. Tanchak,
Vancouver

Pacific Tribune, April 24, 1989 ¢ 5

EE PR Se ot. GAP Ae

VO ot NS ee ee ey Oe Oe

eS Be Be a 6