ER - Pete Nichols OP ED

Baykeeper story wrong on some points
by By Pete Nichols, Director, Humboldt Baykeeper, 12/19/2006

I would like to commend The Eureka Reporter for covering the important issue of pesticide toxicity in the article “Environmental Groups Sue EPA” (Dec. 16) and for highlighting the work of dedicated citizens who are standing up for clean water and a healthy environment.

I would also like to make some corrections to Mr. Rushton’s article. I would first like to correct the confusing innuendo that Humboldt Baykeeper is part of this lawsuit. While we support the enforcement of the Clean Water Act and other laws created to protect the environment, we cannot take credit for this action. It is not mentioned that it is in fact San Francisco Baykeeper who deserves credit for its great work, with Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, to protect the San Francisco Bay and Delta from toxic pollutants.

Secondly, I would like to correct Mr. Rushton for stating that Humboldt Baykeeper’s parent organization is San Francisco Baykeeper. Humboldt Baykeeper and San Francisco Baykeeper are both member organizations of the national Waterkeeper Alliance and the California Coastkeeper Alliance, neither of which govern our respective organizations. Humboldt Baykeeper is a program the Ecological Rights Foundation, whose mission is to further the rights of all people to a clean, healthful and biologically diverse environment.

Lastly, I was surprised that CATs Executive Director Patty Clary, who is one of California’s most knowledgeable experts on the effects of toxins on the environment and humans, was not interviewed for this article. Complex issues such as the toxic contamination of our waterways deserve patient and thorough investigation and appropriate fact checking.

The San Francisco Bay and Delta is one of the most important coastal resources in California. However, just like Humboldt Bay, San Francisco Bay is threatened by the impacts from industrial pollution that can detrimentally impact this fragile system.

As an example, San Francisco Bay has been listed as “impaired” under the Clean Water Act for dioxin contamination since 1999. In fact, when this determination was made, much of the data used revealed levels of dioxin actually lower than those in Humboldt Bay.

Fortunately for both San Francisco and Humboldt Bay, identifying and acknowledging the significant problems of toxic contamination is the first step to finding solutions for the benefit of all.

(Editor’s note: Patty Clary of Californians for Alternatives to Toxics was phoned at work and home for the article and was unable to be reached. Rushton interviewed seven people in attempting to prepare as thorough an article as possible. And although Nichols alleges that there was confusing innuendo created in the article that linked the local Humboldt Baykeeper group to the EPA lawsuit, it was the news release from Clary’s CATs organization that incorrectly identified the San Francisco Baykeeper organization only as “Baykeeper.”)

Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.