Dredging Revealed

The debate over the proposed dredging of the Hudson River reveals some of the same issues we dealt with during our discussion of the SLC plant. Though much of the opposition to the proposed dredging are afraid of the unintended consequences, such as release of more PCBs from the sediment or the destruction of underwater ecosystems, others are just worried about the inconvenience of dredging machines in their community. As the old GE commercials tried to convince local residents several years ago, the dredging may be ugly, noisy, inconvenient and unnecessary in the Hudson; not to mention the fact that the Hudson has already made much progress in the last few years and does not appear (to the naked eye) to be so bad. Like the people of the town of Hudson, everyone wants to do what is best for the environment if possible but no one wants to accept it in their own backyard (or waterfront). The dredging of the Hudson is obviously a different example because it is site specific (the dredging cannot be moved to some other river) and the damage has already been done.

However, I wonder what people would think of the inconvenience of the proposed dredging if the reports, “PCBs in the Upper and Tidal Freshwater Hudson River Estuary: The Science behind the Dredging Controversy” by Baker et al. and “Toxic Substances and Their Impacts on Human Health in the Hudson River Watershed” by Landrigan et al. were made available to them. Perhaps if Hudson river residents received this packet of information created by many prominent scientists about the dangers PCB’s pose on their own lives as well as the life of the River and its underwater inhabitants they would be more willing to accept the potential noise and disruptions for a few years.