A open letter to local food producers and gardeners
from
The Community Committee on the Sudbury Soils Study
Tuesday, November 11th 2008
The Community Committee on the Sudbury Soils Study is writing to clarify some misconceptions regarding our position on the production and consumption of local food.
All our members strongly support growing a strong and vibrant local food economy in the Greater Sudbury area. There are many benefits to eating locally:
- · Consumers can develop a relationship with local producers that we can’t with foods imported from outside the region
- · That relationship allows us to inform ourselves about the way the food is grown
- · The ecological footprint of local producers is much smaller than that of multinational corporations
- · We are supporting local jobs and contributing to the local economy
- · We are enhancing our ability to feed ourselves, and to decrease our dependence on outside food sources.
We would rather eat food grown safely by local producers than supermarket foods. When food comes from the supermarket, we rarely know the conditions under which it has been grown, how far it has traveled, or how the people growing and harvesting it have been treated. From an environmental perspective, supermarkets often have the additional environmental burdens of extra packaging and the increased use of fossil fuels for long distance shipping.
When the results of food-based studies that formed part of the Sudbury Soil Study were released (the Market Basket Daily Intake and the Vegetable Garden Survey) , we discovered that the levels of some metals in the supermarket foods most of us buy were sometimes high enough to put the health of our families at risk.
However, the report on vegetable gardens in the Sudbury area showed that for some gardens, these metal levels were also high, most likely due to smelter emissions. Although only 70 samples were taken, and usually only one sample per property, there was enough evidence to warrant more sampling and analysis being done.
When it came to commercial food operations in the region, only 20 samples were taken from a total of 15 properties.
We don’t think that is enough testing to draw any conclusions. It can’t reassure those of us who produce food for our families and others, nor those who eat it. We support the desire of local food producers to have their food and soil tested.
Dr. Khatter felt that there was enough evidence when it came to vegetable gardens in some parts of the City that real caution should be exercised.
The Committee agrees with him, and wants to work with local producers and gardeners to find out if there are some places that will need remediation before health-giving fruits and vegetables can be grown. We think the costs of that remediation should be borne by the mining companies and by the government that allowed this to happen. In the event that remediation should not be possible, fair compensation should be paid.
The Community Committee on the Sudbury Soils Study came together this summer as result of public concerns with the process and findings of the Sudbury Soil Study Human Health Risk Assessment.
The purposes of the Committee are:
* To ensure that the Sudbury public has access to the necessary information to determine whether they wish to give their informed consent to the risks to the environment and human health from historic and current mining and smelter activities, and can determine effective responses to these risks.
* To move the Ontario Government and its agencies to respond effectively to the Sudbury Soil Study findings. This response must ensure that contamination from mines and smelters in the Sudbury region is properly identified, remediated and (where it cannot be remediated) contained, and that those whose health might be affected (or may be affected) by contamination are provided with diagnosis, treatment and (where this is not possible) with compensation.
Our concerns with the Human Health Risk Assessment, and with the Sudbury Soils Study in general, focus primarily on the fact that there has been little opportunity for the public to educate itself on or to provide input into the research process. Nor has there been opportunity for our community to decide for ourselves the risk we are willing to live –those decisions have been made for us.
We regret that, while the community committee has been working on ensuring Sudburian’s health and safety, the headlines in the local media last week drifted off the key points addressed in the Environmental Defence Report, (www.toxicnation.com), and placed local food producers in the eye of the storm .
The focus needs to shift back to where it belongs, which is on the Soils Study and on the need for open public debate on the concerns that our community might have.
Let’s work together to build a local food system we can rely on in the Greater Sudbury Area.
Respectfully,
Joan Kuyek, Chair
On behalf of the
Community Committee on the Soils Study
c/o Rick Grylls, 19 Regent Street, Sudbury ON P3B 4B7
Sphere: Related Content
