SCIENCE OR MOSTLY GAMESMANSHIP?

So Thursday morning I discovered that a 700 plus page report had been sent me by e-mail (yet again). It is titled the "2020 Canagagigue Creek Sediment and Soil Investigation". Last fall additional soil and sediment sampling was undertaken to allegedly fill in data gaps etc. from the inadequate 2017 Canagagigue Creek Soil and sediment Report. In my opinion, and as expressed here, the 2017 report was inadequate for a plethora of reasons. My recollection includes amateurish and error ridldled Tables, text and more. It includes Method Detection Limits possibly for hundreds of samples that were far in excess of the provincial or federal criteria that the concentrations of various contaminants were being compared to. As a direct result there were likely hundreds of results that were pure and simple garbage. In other words flatly stating that there are no exceedances of criteria for DDT or dioxins/furans for example that are saddled with Method Detection Limits (MDLs) that are dozens to hundreds of times higher than the health based criteria is simply, in my opinion, fraudulent. It is an intentional attempt to minimize a horrible environmental situation that calls out for extensive and expensive remediation. Lastly the actual method of sampling for sediments in the bottom of the creek was a farce. Instead of consistently using a proper core sampler to get a consistent sample of sediments at the bottom of the creek, they repeatedly used a shovel that of course lost most of its sediments as it was lifted through the water to the surface. The excuse was that the bottom of the creek was "armoured" with coarse gravel, stone etc. .......................................................................................................... Enough of a stink was raised over the shovel methos versus core sampling that adjustments were made for this report. Essentially locations for sediment sampling were transferred away from sections of the bottom of the creek that were armoured. Geez rocket science it isn't but hopefully it works better and gives good data versus the last stupid attempts. Much of what was sampled was long overdue although while I haven't completed reading the report it once again looks like way too little sampling and way too much gamesmanship. Background sampling has been ignored for a very long time. Uniroyal Chemical managed to screw up the environment both on and off their own property. They mangaed to dispose of toxic wastes in areas that they never should have. This included formal municipal landfills and if rumours are accurate on private property around Elmira for a price. What we do know is that both Uniroyal and Varnicolor Chemical used and abused dumping priveleges at a host of different landfills in Waterloo Region including several in and around Elmira. ............................................................................................................................... This latest report has similar problems with far too many samples being tested at unrealistic, basically ridiculously high MDLs that completely negate any possibility of knowing whether the sample actually has DDT or dioxin in it. Of course Lanxess's consultants GHD, interpret every Mickey Mouse Non-Detect result with high MDls as evidence of a lack of their client's contaminants being present in the sample. How convenient and how self-serving. This is where the old saying about the fox being in charge of the hen house came from. It is an unimaginable conflict of interest and in an honest, democratic and reasonable society this report and its authors would be thrown out the door and told never to return. Not in Elmira however. .......................................................................................................................... All the four background samples plus the new sampling in Reaches 4,3, and 2 of the Canagagigue Creek included soils and sediments. Not however in the Background area to the creek composed of the Stroh farm. There after seven years we have only had two locations (4 samples) sampled in the bottom of the Stroh Drain for sediments. The results were in excess of the federal sediment quality guidelines. They were also high when compared with most of the rest of the other sediment results in this report. Further examination is required but to date it is clear that DDT and metabolytes are being grossly minimized with high MDLs. Dioxins not nearly as much. Lindane is also being disadvantaged by the use of ridiculously high Method Detection Limits which essentially indicate that the laboratory can not measure low enough to even come close to the calculated and MEASURABLE criteria that have been determined by our governments to protect us and wildlife. I shall continue reading this outrage.