Friends of the Earth

By the Mother Earth News editors

TOXICS OFF TEXAS

The seeming serenity of the South Pacific belies that region's radiation-contamination problems

Last November the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held hearings in Texas to present its plan for the incineration of hazardous wastes on "burn ships" in the Gulf of Mexico. The agency was in such a hurry that it wanted to issue permits for burning 800,000 tons of toxic wastes — including liquid PCB's, DDT, and dioxins— before disposal regulations were even established.

Fortunately, more than 6,000 people showed up at the hearings to protest that plan. Among those who testified was Texas Governor Mark White. Witnesses spoke of the risk to the seafood and tourism industries along the Gulf Coast, and presented a petition signed by 10,000 opponents of the plan.

Even Jacques Cousteau joined the fray, stating before the committee that he "could think of no worse place for such dangerous chemicals to be transported than the sea". His comments were backed up by a statement from Greenpeace that, for every 100,000 tons of toxics burned at sea, 100 tons of highly poisonous material would be released into the marine environment, where it would enter the food chain. Moreover, the group explained, if an accident were ever to occur, a cleanup might actually be impossible!

PROBLEMS IN THE PACIFIC

Since the dawn of the nuclear age, the residents of the Pacific have seen their share of hazardous substances. And now, the French seem to be going out of their way to keep things hot in Tahiti. By the end of 1983 France had detonated 100 nuclear weapons, primarily on the nearby island of Muraroa, and many people suggest that the effects of these explosions are being covered up.

Teams of scientists have been brought in to study the situation, but observers in Tahiti have come to regard this effort as an empty gesture. According to Marie-Thérèse and Bengt Danielsson, two well-known antinuclear activists, the teams are typically flown in for no more than a few days . . . and are never provided with the data necessary to determine the real extent of the damage. By all appearances, we're told, the French have turned Tahitian islands into radioactive "Swiss cheese" and have made little effort to monitor the effects. More important, they've paid no attention to the impact of their tests on the atmosphere and water of nearby islands.

If the results of a study by the Bikini Atoll Rehabilitation Committee are any indication, folks in Tahiti should be concerned. Led by Harvard Medical School radiation biologist Dr. Henry Kohn, the group reported recently that the 23 nuclear devices exploded there have left the topsoil so contaminated that it would have to be replaced (or covered) before the island could be considered habitable.

The residents of Bikini were evacuated after World War II (so that weapons tests could be conducted) but were told they could return in 1958. In 1973, after they were finally allowed to actually go home, it was discovered that the local produce was highly contaminated. So, in 1978 the islanders were removed once again. Today they're hoping that Congress will appropriate funds to clean up their home, but—to judge from a similar undertaking at Eniwetok more than ten years ago—the bill would probably exceed $100 million.

PINEAPPLES AND PESTICIDES

A little closer to the U.S. mainland, the Aloha State has also been having its share of environmental problems. For decades, the Hawaiian pineapple industry has been using hazardous chemicals to combat tropical weeds and pests. And, despite assurances of safety from chemical manufacturers, the state has just discovered that pesticides have found their way into Oahu's Pearl Harbor aquifer. The groundwater in central Oahu used to be some of the purest in the country, but residents have had to stop drinking their tap water since it's been found to contain an alphabet soup of chemicals: DBCP, EDB, and 123 TCP are all extremely hazardous substances.

Residents of Mililani Town have taken the users of pesticides (Libby and Del Monte) and the manufacturers (Shell, Dow, and Occidental) to court to sue for an estimated $1 billion (the predicted costs for the cleanup and for ongoing medical attention for the 6,000 families exposed to the pesticide-laced water over the last several years). The state is looking for alternative sources of drinking water . . . and hoping that similar problems won't crop up on other islands, where thousands of acres of pineapple and sugar plantations dot the landscape.

AND NOW, THE GOOD NEWS

The National Park Service has finally changed the Yellowstone Park grizzly bear management policies that may have been contributing to the steady population decline of this endangered species. Today, only 200 grizzlies remain in the Yellowstone area, and they're still being killed off faster than they can reproduce.

For 20 years the Park Service has operated under a policy that has protected humans . . . keeping the bears away from visitor areas, killing those animals that were deemed unmanageable, and closing up garbage dumps. The dump closings were also meant to force the bears to rely more heavily on natural food sources, but growing mineral, logging, and tourist activities have only made it harder for the bears to find food. Outside the park, many hungry bruins have been killed by livestock owners and poachers.

After years of criticism of this policy (by environmentalists, other federal agencies, citizen groups, and wildlife study teams), the Park Service is now concentrating on keeping humans out of bear habitat and cracking down on poachers. But the Defenders of Wildlife warn that new approaches need to be implemented quickly, "or else there won't be any bears left to talk about".

In other areas, wild animals are actually growing in number. The National Parks and Conservation Association, working with a team from the University of Maryland, has found that some species seem to be profiting from national park visitation. For example, varieties of rodents, birds, reptiles, and insects have increased and have relocated to picnic areas, where there's often edible refuse.

Of course, visitors have also contributed to other changes in our parks, such as soil compaction—which can result in erosion and increased water runoff—and the loss of native vegetation. The study team will soon produce a handbook for visitors, entitled "The Citizens' Action Guide to Visitor Use Management". The booklet should help park managers and volunteers to alleviate the destructive effects of our visits to national parks.

EDITORS NOTE: The worldwide organization called Friends of the Earth is one of the most effective environmental groups in existence today, and the activities of FOE — along with a broad range of other news concerning ecological developments — are described each month in its publication titled Not Man Apart. You can become a member of Friends of the Earth, and receive the excellent tabloid, by sending $25 ($100 for sponsor, $1,000 for life, $12 student/low income) — or $15 for a subscription only — to FOE, Dept. TMEN, 1045 Sansome Street, San Francisco, California 94111.