Tittabawassee River Watch Editorial          Back to editorial page  

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Kathy Henry  May 18, 2005 in response to MDN article: Hearing for dioxin facility bill set for Tuesday

First, let's make it clear that our opposition to this bill has nothing to do with a lawsuit filed against Dow on behalf of property owners living along the Tittabawassee River. We filed the lawsuit long before properties were ever designated as part of Dow's "facility".

Any logical person would conclude the same as the MDEQ has. If your property is frequently flooded, it is contaminated. During flooding, the soil is constantly moving around, re-depositing everywhere, every time it floods. Samples taken from fishing docks at Freeland Festival Park by the DEQ after past floods have shown more than 500 ppt on the docks. The contamination is found to be more than 4 feet deep in floodplain soils.

This same logic holds true in Midland where dioxin deposition mainly comes from air borne emissions from Dow's incinerators.

Should one believe that the river floods, or the air emissions are selective, only depositing their contaminants in a few choice areas?

What if I chose to have the "facility" label, so that Dow would be required to clean up my property, but my neighbor upstream chose not to. Next flood, my "clean" property would again be contaminated by flood waters from that upstream neighbor and from the contaminated river sediments. Thanks a lot.
Instead of the DEQ "blanketing" the area with a contamination label, John Moolenaar, Mike Goschka and the like are attempting to blanket an area with permission to commit fraud. God help unsuspecting out-of-town home buyers if this bill passes. Or home buyers in the entire state for that matter.

Let's not forget individuals who receive soil from local landscapers, who would be permitted to remove soils from the contaminated floodplain, and distribute the soils through out all of our counties. The "facility" designation currently does not allow this.

Do the wild game in the area that now have a health advisory against eating them by state and federal governments secretly know where these contamination "hot spots" are, and willing feed there so they will not be hunted? This is about as logical as what is being proposed.

Truth science is out there everywhere, for those who choose to read it. This "sound science" aka Dow science, is trying to be forced on the residents in our area with terrible consequence to all but Dow Chemical. Politicians and Dow are the only ones who will benefit from such a bill.


Back to editorial page