Help
Clean The
River
and Bay!
Fox
River Home
Search
Index
to Site
Recent
Additions
Frequent
Questions
Media
Coverage
History
Statistics
Maps
PCB
Chemistry
Human
Health
Wildlife
Health
Economic
Damage
Corporate
Profiles
Compensation
Sediment
Cleanup
Cleanup
Technologies
State
Government
Federal
Government
Local
Government
Native
Nations
International
& Great Lakes
Technical
Assistance
Other
PCB Sites
Links
Photo
Gallery
Political
Cartoons
Message
Board
Guestbook
|
July 22,
2009 - by Rebecca L. Katers
Several local, state and
federal government agencies are trying to push through changes that
will obscure local environmental problems in the Green Bay area by simply defining
them out of
existence.
In the 1980s, a list of 13
problems were identified, and these formed the basis for clean-up
planning. Now, the agencies are writing
“Delisting Targets”
to allow them to take each problem off the list and declare
victory, in many cases when serious problems still exist.
A public comment period is
being held right now (comments due by August 6). It’s
vital that
everyone protest these changes, because premature delisting would
undercut
future efforts to better address problems. We
would have no local mandate or hope of government
funding if our
problems are declared “solved.”
Background
The Lower
Green
Bay and Fox River Area
of Concern (AOC) is one of 43 Great Lakes sites that
were identified in the mid 1980’s by the United
States and Canada under the Great
Lakes Water
Quality Agreement (GLWQA).
Our
AOC includes the lower 7.4 mi of the Fox River below the
De Pere Dam and a 21 mi2 area of southern Green Bay out to
Point au Sable and Long Tail
Point. In
1987, amendments to the GLWQA defined Beneficial Use
Impairments
(BUIs) and 11 were identified for our AOC and 2 more were
“suspected.” They
formed the basis of the Lower Green Bay Remedial Action Plan
of 1988,
which was
the first comprehensive statement of clean up actions needed for our
area.
These
are the current Beneficial
Use Impairments listed for the Lower Green Bay and Fox River:
- degraded fish and wildlife populations
- loss of fish and wildlife habitat
- degraded benthos (bottom dwelling insects, crustaceans,
worms, etc.)
- degraded phytoplankton / zooplankton populations (floating
microorganisms)
- eutrophication or undesirable algae
- beach closings / recreational restrictions
- degradation of aesthetics (offensive water odor,
unsightliness, etc.)
- restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption
- restrictions on dredging activities
- bird or animal deformities or reproductive problems
- restrictions on drinking water or taste/odor problems
- tainted fish and wildlife flavor (suspected)
- fish tumors and other deformities (suspected)
While many of the “Delisting Criteria” written by the
agencies are reasonable targets, several are serious attacks on our
ability to
work on issues in the future.
Just a few
examples:
Swimming - The Beach
Closings
/ Recreational Restrictions BUI would be delisted “when public swimming
beaches
within the AOC are open for swimming for 95% of the swimming season
(between
Memorial day and Labor Day) for any 5 year period based on Wisconsin
Coastal
Beach monitoring protocols for E. Coli
monitoring and meet the blue-green algae target for 95% of the swimming
season.”
This
is an extremely weak standard, because there is only one official
“public
swimming beach” in the entire AOC, at Communiversity
Park by UW-Green Bay. No
other waters of the river or bay would be
addressed, despite the fact that many private shoreline owners,
boaters, skiers,
anglers, hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts frequently swim or dip
in the
waters outside official beaches, and often use the waters in spring and
fall
also, not just in summer. The rule
allows waters to be unsafe for swimming 5% of the time.
Warning systems are haphazard or non-existent
for alerting the public to those times. Parents
couldn’t be sure their kids wouldn’t get a serious
reaction or
infection 5% of the time. The agencies
claim swimmers would be protected by whether our AOC is included on the
list of
impaired waters due to pathogen contamination or blue-green algae in
the most
recent Wisconsin Impaired Waters list, but those samples are taken far
too
infrequently and in too few places to provide true swimming guidance on
a day-to-day basis.
Fish
Warnings - The Restrictions on Fish and Wildlife
Consumption BUI would be
delisted when: “Fish and wildlife
consumption advisories are the same or lower than those in the
associated Great
Lake
or appropriate control site.”
Our AOC would be defined as “unimpaired” even
when we have serious local health warnings against fish eating. Up to 70% of the PCBs in the main portion of
Lake Michigan and more in Upper Green
Bay came from the Fox River, and that
contamination would insulate our area from being considered impaired. It makes no sense. In
addition, the governments approved a BADLY
weakened Fox River and Bay clean up plan which will allow fish
advisories to
continue for more than 30 years in the river and more than 100 years in
the Bay
(…and if the sediment caps fail, who knows how long it will be?) If we’re impaired, it’s because they allowed
it. They must not be allowed to escape
the “impaired” label, and their failure, by defining it away.
Human Health - There is
no specific "Beneficial Use Impairment" for human health though it
clearly should be a key factor weighed in several BUIs. It's
truly shocking that we have had no good epidemiological human studies
of local health measures related to the river and bay, other
than a handful of children's studies.
Some data show that we have elevated rates of
certain types of cancer, diabetes, respiratory and other illnesses in
our area that could be related to local water pollution (plus other
exposures) but none of the proposed delisting criteria require ANY
human health studies prior to delisting.
The fish advisories are used as a surrogate for
human health protection, but this is grossly inadequate because only a
handful of chemicals are measured in the fish. The water and
sediment criteria are also weak from this perspective.
It's time for our elected officials and regulatory
agencies to conduct DIRECT studies and measurements of human exposures
and illnesses which may be linked to these exposures. The
delisting criteria must be modified to include requirements for these
studies.
Dredging Restrictions - The
Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI would be delisted when “All
remediation
actions for known contaminated sediment sources are completed and
monitored
according to the approved remediation plans, the remedial action goals
have
been achieved, and institutional controls have been implemented.”
This
proposal is an outrage, because they’re saying that because they’ve
done a
so-called "cleanup" and have a dredging PLAN, then impairments no
longer exist. In fact, commercial dredging
of the 17 mile
shipping channel will be heavily restricted 10 years from now, even
after the cleanup is supposedly done. The
extensive and scattered sediment caps
chosen by the corporate PCB polluters for the Fox
River
cleanup will close at least 3 miles of the shipping channel and
severely
restrict future dredging in many other sections of the river. Commercial dredging of the shipping channel
will
also face continuing disposal restrictions due to residual dredge spoil
contamination allowed by the government. If
we’re impaired, it’s because the DNR and EPA allowed it.
They must not be allowed to escape the
“impaired” label, and their failure, by defining it away.
Deformities &
Reproductive Problems - The Bird or
Animal Deformities or Reproductive Problems BUI could be delisted: If fish tissue or other food sources (e.g.
insects and amphibians) concentrations of contaminants of concern
identified in
the AOC are: (a) at or lower than the
levels known to cause reproductive or developmental problems in fish,
fish-eating birds, and mammals, or (b) are not statistically different
than
Lake Michigan.
This
is similar to the fish warnings above. If
our AOC has deformities and reproductive problems, then
we’re
impaired. Period. Contamination and
deformities elsewhere are NOT an excuse for those problems here!
Also, contaminant levels must not be allowed to persist at
levels known to cause problems.
Drinking Water – The EPA
pushed HARD to delist our area for Restrictions on Drinking Water or
Taste/Odor
Problems, on the grounds that there aren’t any communities using our
AOC for
drinking water. They said that as long
as the 2 pipelines to Lake Michigan
are in
service and groundwater supplies are used, that we could be delisted.
The
local technical committees who were drafting these criteria saw how
ridiculous
this was, and fixed it to a commonsense measure of local water quality
and
whether standard treatment could make river or bay water safe for
drinking. We need to watch closely to
ensure that EPA doesn’t change it back.
Rare and Endangered Wildlife Species
- There are several good wildlife
targets proposed, but endangered species are neglected. Our area could
be
delisted and considered unimpaired when “A balance of diverse habitat
types exists
within the AOC that supports all life stage requirements of fish and
wildlife
populations including … habitat for state or federally listed species
(special
concern, threatened, or endangered).”
Habitat is the only
focus. There is
no mandate
to create and implement a recovery plan to establish sustainable
populations of
rare listed species, which might require extra efforts, such as
stocking,
breeding inducements, predator control, etc. More
importantly, there is no mandate that such a plan be
proven successful
before our area could be delisted.
Aesthetics - The Degradation of Aesthetics BUI would be
delisted
when: “Monitoring data within the AOC and/or surveys for any five year
period
indicates that water bodies in the AOC do not exhibit unacceptable
levels of
the following properties in quantities which interfere with the Water
Quality
Standards for Surface Waters: (a)
Substances that will cause objectionable deposits on the shore or in
the bed of
a body of water shall not be present in such amounts as to interfere
with
public rights in waters of the state or impair use.
(b) Floating or submerged debris, oil, scum,
or other material shall not be present in such amounts as to interfere
with
public rights in waters of the state or impair use.
(c) Materials producing color, odor, taste,
or unsightliness shall not be present in such amounts as to interfere
with
public rights in waters of the state or impair use”
The
problem here is interpretation. When
such vague words are used, it’s too easy for bureaucrats to say
“There’s no
standard violated, so you’re free to swim in it,” even when a normal
person
would say the water smells awful, is too warm, and looks disgusting. A criteria needs to be added saying, “A
professional survey of a random, representative sample of 1,000 people
living
within the AOC community and who come in contact with the waterway
finds that
at least 90% of the respondents feel river and bay waters are
aesthetically
acceptable” before our area can be delisted. Artificial
warming of the water should also be considered
an aesthetic
impairment.)
Suspected Impairments –
Rather than investigate the last two impairments and determine whether
they are
true problems, the EPA is dropping them. But
local fishermen have definitely complained
of local fish taste problems in the past, and studies by the U.S. Fish
&
Wildlife Service have found elevated levels of fish tumors in our area. The agencies should have to conduct surveys
and take a respectable number of samples. They
should have to prove local tumor rates are no longer
elevated above
natural background levels. Problems
should not be dropped without proof.
Evidence for Delisting
- Many
of the proposed criteria fail to specify how much measuring must be
done, and
for how long, before an impairment could be delisted.
So, permanent delisting might occur after
just one favorable year or one favorable measurement, despite the fact
that
problems could resurface the next year or the next time a sample is
taken. This must be fixed to ensure that
adequate
monitoring is done and improvements persist at least 5 years before
delisting.
Dishonest Public
Involvement Process - The DNR and EPA rigged the so-called
"public input process" for these delisting criteria - to stifle public
awareness and comments, and to reinforce the agencies' choices. (For details, click here.)
Conclusion
Overall, this delisting proposal
is offensive because it is dishonest and will block good work in the
future. The agencies propose to violate
the plain meaning of the word “impaired” and mislead the public about
the
safety and health of their river and bay.
We need our government to tell us the true conditions
and aim for a true
healing of our waterway. Instead,
the
agencies are trying to hold us back and keep us at an “average” level
of Great Lakes pollution, pulling a
rug out from under our
Remedial Action Plan.
Successful, true elimination
of impairments should be the ONLY test of
whether we still have an “Area of
Concern,” regardless of conditions at other Great
Lakes
sites.
Please Write TODAY!
Please mail
your comments to
the DNR right away, by August 6, 2009,
to:
Ms. Erin Hanson
Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources
2984 Shawano Avenue
Green Bay, WI 54311
You are welcome to send in our pre-written
comment letter,
or use it as an example for your own personal
letter.
back to top
|
