home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
072991
/
0729104.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
84 lines
<text id=91TT1655>
<title>
July 29, 1991: Environment:Death of a River
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1991
July 29, 1991 The World's Sleaziest Bank
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
NATION, Page 24
ENVIRONMENT
Death of a River
</hdr><body>
<p>An ecological catastrophe in California points to the need for
new rules on the transport of toxic compounds
</p>
<p>By Philip Elmer-Dewitt--Reported by Jeanne McDowell/Los Angeles
and Linda Williams/New York
</p>
<p> As it wound through the canyons southwest of Mount
Shasta, 60 miles below the Oregon border, the Sacramento River
was a babbling stream, rugged enough to attract kayakers, yet
so pristine that it supported a thriving population of
blue-ribbon trout. Each year the 45-mile stretch of river lured
thousands of anglers and tourists, drawn by the bucolic setting
and the reputation of its native rainbows and browns.
</p>
<p> But now the trout are dead, the fishing is finished, and
the tourist industry is suffering. A Southern Pacific tanker
car derailed last week on a tricky canyon bridge six miles
north of Dunsmuir, Calif., and spilled its contents into the
river: 19,500 gal. of metam sodium, a liquid herbicide.
</p>
<p> As environmentalists and sports fishermen watched in
horror, a 10-mile lime green plume of death drifted slowly down
the river, wiping out most of the eco system--aquatic plants,
nymphs, caddis flies, mayflies and at least 100,000 trout. Even
more alarming to Californians was that the spill occurred 27
miles upstream of Lake Shasta, the state's largest man-made
reservoir.
</p>
<p> Fortunately, the long-term threat to humans is probably
minimal. Lake Shasta holds 550 billion gal. of water and should
easily absorb the spill. Health officials say the water is safe
to drink. But the incident served as a reminder that no one
living in a modern industrial society is safe from an
environmental catastrophe like the one that befell the
Sacramento. Each year more than 1.5 million carloads of poisons,
solvents, pesticides and other hazardous materials are hauled
across the U.S. by train. Given the sheer volume of traffic,
accidental chemical releases are inevitable, and they occur at
the rate of about three a day. In 1988 there were 1,015 toxic
rail spills; last year there were 1,254 such incidents, an
increase of nearly 25%.
</p>
<p> Environmentalists complain that not enough has been done
to ensure that the trucks and tanker cars are puncture-proof
and that they avoid particularly dangerous routes. The Chemical
Manufacturers Association replies that it is already hamstrung
by thousands of federal, state and local statutes. But it
concedes that those laws were written with an eye to protecting
human populations, not the environment. Chemicals that are
explosive, flammable or toxic to humans are classified as very
hazardous and handled accordingly. A pesticide like metam
sodium, which can destroy an entire ecosystem, is still
considered nonhazardous.
</p>
<p> The death of the river may help change all that. The
National Transportation Safety Board has long argued for
stronger, safer cars for carrying so-called environmentally
sensitive chemicals, and the idea has gained support on Capitol
Hill, where the Federal Railroad Safety Act is up for revision.
Scientists say it may be 10 years before the Sacramento River
has fully recovered. Perhaps by then tanker cars will be safe
enough to guarantee that a disaster like last week's can not
happen again.
</p>
</body></article>
</text>