Monitoring needed to guarantee safety

Regarding the article “DEC says Alaska fish are safe to eat” (Clarion, Jan. 24):


Let me see, is that the same Department of Environmental Conservation that says the toxic monofill in Nikiski is safe and that the injection of poisonous drilling waste into wells below Soldotna and surrounding areas is safe?

The first paragraph of the article strikes a blow to DEC’s responsible monitoring when it declares that the DEC “isn’t actively testing fish for radiation” and then goes on to say, “We try to test for things that we think present real risk, like mercury.” And then, as if they know, the FDA and EPA says their monitoring shows no dangerous level of radiation in Pacific fish.

Now, I’ll admit I’m not the brightest bulb in the box, but even I can see the fallacies in the article. If DEC isn’t actively testing for radiation, how can it say that there isn’t a threat? Also, just what is a “dangerous level” when there is no safe level when it comes to radiation?

And the greatest fallacy of all is the notion that current levels will not change. The EPA, FDA, and DEC all state that there is no threat. Now, that may be somewhat true for today at least, but where’s consistent monitoring and reporting by non-federal/non-state agencies?

Visit and see what other scientists are saying. In the midst of this growing threat (400 tons of dangerous radiation is being dumped into the Pacific every day), we should see, at least weekly, the results of extensive monitoring in Alaska’s coastal waters. But, since no extensive monitoring is even taking place, how then can any “expert” proclaim that no threat exists?


Letter: Hutchings a good fit for borough

Hutchings a good fit for borough

Read more

Letter: Pierce shows integrity, ethics

Pierce shows integrity, ethics

Read more

Letter: Hutchings has temperament to be mayor

Hutchings has temperament to be mayor

Read more

Letter: Health care a factor in vote for Hutchings

Health care access a factor in vote for Hutchings

Read more