A September 2009 Associated Press (AP) investigation showed that the federal government rarely assesses or attempts to rectify the problem of mercury pollution in California’s major waterways caused by long-abandoned mercury mines.
The mines have been around for more than a century ever since they were constructed en masse during the mercury mining era that saw California become the top producer of silver in the country. It’s a case that embodies the oft-misunderstood relationship between man and environment and it also illuminates the far-reaching impact of our actions.
The state is a hub for more than 550 of these defunct mines most located in its central mountainous region giving it the highest tally in the nation. Pollution assessment studies have been few. Furthermore only 10 cleanups have been conducted though these mines continue to tarnish the quality of water air and soil in the state— and most of these cleanups have been ineffective in stemming the contamination.
The effects on human health are alarming. According to the AP review mercury pollution disproportionately affects the nearly 100000 poor and immigrants who depend on local fish for their diet and thereby regularly consume more than 10 times the dose deemed safe by the Environmental Protection Agency. Elevated mercury levels have also been found in American Indians residing in northern parts of the state where much of the mercury ends up settling.
Such toxic levels of mercury notably cause neurological problems like headaches tremors and brain damage. Mercury ingestion during pregnancy is associated with brain damage and mental retardation in children. Impalpable as it may seem neither the state nor the federal government has conducted studies on the long-term health implications of such conditions.
This case is also one of health disparities in action. It’s an unfortunate reality that environmental hazards plague certain demographics of the population more than others. The people that live in these mercury-polluted regions do so by necessity. The living standards that many of us enjoy— residing in a safe environment and having healthful nutritional sources— don’t hold up everywhere.
At a time when the advancement of health care dominates the national conversation the need for the prevention of medical problems is as pressing as ever. One of the key features of the highly publicized health reform bill though somewhat removed from the popular discussion is its commitment to community health and disease prevention.Indeed the most robust solution to our health system’s woes would be to keep people out of hospitals in the first place. Support for causes in environmental health can help many people at once.
This issue is a quandary of both epidemiological and ecological consequence. To provide one example mercury from these waters also trails into wildlife refuges. We belong to an expansive and complex ecosystem that shares more in common than we realize. In these circumstances the implications of our past environmental impact are made particularly clear.
A noteworthy conclusion of the AP review was that “the government is often loath to assume cleanup costs and risk litigation from a failed project.” Financial and legal considerations certainly carry importance but they are vastly outweighed by the foreseeable good of addressing the problem and improving the human condition.
Must government protect its citizenry from the environment? The role of government as a guardian has historically been a point of debate amongst political theorists but at the very least something should be done to deter the 100000 people currently utilizing the waters for their diets. Such actions could include bridging the information gap regarding safety or constructing barriers of some sort to emphasize prevention.
An investment in environmental health stacks up well against its alternatives. Government would do well to pursue a cause that improves the health of the citizenry promotes environmental responsibility and demonstrates accountability. Any investment that improves quality of life is high-yield and should be prioritized particularly amid current cries for disease prevention as a way of mending American health care.