Sir: Frank Graham has written a lively account of the controversy over the Prestile Stream (“That Mess on the Prestile,” February, 1970). Unfortunately, his journalistic effort on behalf of a worthy cause—environmental improvement—is marred by several inaccuracies.
First, the Prestile did not change from a pure trout stream to a polluted watercourse in 1960, when the Vahlsing potato-processing plant was built, or in 1965, when construction began on the Vahlsing sugar-beet refinery. Fish kills and blocked fish migrations were documented by state agencies as early as 1953. The fight over the discharges from the Vahlsing potato plant should be examined against the background of sewage discharges from Easton and Mars Hill, starch-factory discharges, and the dumping of potatoes along the stream. The B classification represented a goal, not a physical fact. The sugar-beet refinery has never polluted the Prestile. Reclassification was a temporary technical step, and it did not affect and has not affected the quality of the stream.
Second, the sugar-beet refinery did not take Vahlsing off the hook with respect to his potato-processing plant discharges. The temporary change in classification to D was in effect only from January, 1967, until October, 1967, when the stream was reclassified to C. The original change in classification from B to D, incidentally, was made at the insistence of bond counsel from the underwriters of the Maine Industrial Authority, not the federal government. The haste in the change was dictated by the necessity of having the refinery in operation in time to process the fall, 1966, crop of beets in order to retain the Maine sugar-beet allotment. …
Senator Muskie reluctantly supported the reclassification on three grounds: (a) the refinery could not be financed without it; (b) the reclassification would cover only the period of start-up for the plant and, in his view, should be restored to B at the end of that time; and (c) the refinery would be designed and built with the most effective water utilization and waste treatment facilities. …
Third, the basic problem in dealing with the Prestile and similar difficulties on other Maine streams has been the antiquated Maine classification law, which requires legislative action for improvements in water quality standards and which does not provide adequate enforcement authority for the Environmental Improvement Commission. … In 1957 Governor Muskie initiated the first changes to upgrade the classification of Maine waters. …
I have cited the foregoing facts to counter the unfortunate impression … that Senator Muskie has been indifferent to pollution problems associated with industrial development in Maine and that he maintains a cozy relationship with Maine industrialists. William Caldwell, who is Mr. Graham’s only authority for the Senator’s “friendship” with Mr. Vahlsing, is not the most unbiased or accurate observer on the Maine political scene. Senator Muskie knew Mr. Vahlsing only slightly as a Maine businessman and not as a friend when Vahlsing entered the sugar-beet project, and he has dealt with Vahlsing as a constituent ever since. There has been no “friendship” to be “strained.” …
Donald E. Nicoll
Administrative Assistant to
Senator Edmund S. Muskie Washington, D.C.
MR. GRAHAM REPLIES
Sir: … The point at issue in my article was Senator Muskie’s decision to support the declassification of the Prestile. In the light of the state’s claim that Vahlsing had violated antipollution regulations thirty-one times in the previous five years, this support cannot be justified. Trouble was inevitable.
It is true that the Prestile was polluted long before 1965. But the town of Mars Hill had invested in a treatment plant, and its efforts were undone by the potato wastes. Indeed, I wrote that by 1965 “The Prestile’s quality was B only on the W.I.C.'s [Water Improvement Commission] books; in fact, it had become an open sewer.”
I do not defend Maine’s antiquated pollution laws. I simply said that the proposal to lower the Prestile’s classification was a device to circumvent even those deficient laws.
I specifically said that the sugar-beet refinery “apparently has not become a source of pollution.” I pointed out that by lowering the classification and by backing millions of dollars of loans to Vahlsing, state officials obviously had hindered the legal effort to secure abatement of the potato wastes. In this sense the state took the company “off the hook” and opened the way to the 1968 border incident.
Finally, I did not attempt to measure Senator Muskie’s affection for Fred Vahlsing. Whatever its degree, however, I am certain it was strained by the fiasco on the New Brunswick border.
As for Mr. Erwin, I did not mention his name in the article, and I sympathize with his plight. In the passages he objected to I was making the point that neither he nor his predecessor could move effectively against the pollution without jeopardizing the state’s investment in the sizable sugar-beet loans. The resultant flurry of legal activity which was slow to produce results became a source of the conservationists’ dissatisfaction.
DELEHANTY’S FINEST
Sir: I read with great interest the article “The Policeman’s Lot” in the February, 1970, issue. However, I do have one correction. On page 11 there is a picture of
women doing exercises with the caption “Those above are members of the New York department’s class of 1923” … [but] the picture you show is the graduating class of the Delehanty Institute Policewomen’s Course in the year 1923. The man standing on the right-hand side of the picture, with the sweater on, is the late M. J. Delehanty, founder of the institute. …
D. R. Howland
Vice President
The Delehanty Institute New York, New York
The information for our caption came from Spring 3100, the official magazine of the New Tork City Police Department.—Ed.
GROWING PAINS
Sir:… We have a fair city which one could say is beset by all the pollution and conservation problems rolled into one.…
When my husband and I, as newlyweds, arrived in Ventura (short for San Buenaventura) in 1948, it was a beautiful town of 18,000 built around two valuable commodities, agriculture and oil. Our geographical location was superb, between the ocean and the mountains. There was no influx or smog from the Los Angeles Basin. …
Now I will list our condition twenty-two years later—a mere twenty-two years later. …
1. Ventura has grown to 55,000. …
2. Valuable agricultural land, assessed beyond the point where it can be farmed, is disappearing at the rate of hundreds of acres per year.
3. The oil business has deteriorated locally (other than offshore, which brings no local tax money directly, only pollution) to the point where the county and city receive only a small fraction of what they used to get.
4. The heart of our city has become blocks and blocks of empty stores. …
5. Our grand old California Mission sits in a dreadfully depressed area of a once thriving downtown.
6. Our magnificent courthouse, built in 1912, which commands a splendid view on the side of a hill overlooking the ocean, has been allowed to deteriorate to the point where it is now being abandoned. …
7. Industry is being beckoned to the city to bring back a weakened tax base.
8. Trees, monuments, mountains, and sanity are all being plowed under or sheared off in the face of “progress.”
9. Pollution is evident everywhere. …
Can we control our growth so it will not become a disaster? Can we stir up interest in preservation to the point where the taxpayer can see the advantage? … All growth and change are not necessarily progress. Ventura is the fastest growing county in the United States at this time, and the pain that goes with it is in the same ratio. …
Barbara Udsen
City Councilwoman San Buenaventura, California
WRECKERS’ LOSSES
Sir: It is my pleasure to offer a correction to your article entitled “A Wrecker’s Dozen” (February, 1970). The Emmanuel Shearith Israel Synagogue which you have pictured will not be torn down as part of an urban renewal project. The synagogue was placed on the National Register of Historic Places … before final go-ahead for federal funds was authorized. …
Robert Fink
Assistant to the Director
State Historical Society of Colorado Denver, Colorado
WRECKERS’ LOSSES
Sir:… You will be pleased to know that the Destrehan Manor House is not doomed. The landmark is located on property owned by American Oil Company, where we once operated a refinery. After the refinery was abandoned and dismantled in 1959, the Manor House became the object of vandalism and other deterioration. This occurred despite our providing around-the-clock guard service after the refinery was closed.
We are now negotiating to sell the property. While doing so, we intend that the sale exclude the Manor House and some surrounding property. This we plan to donate to a local historical society with whom we’ve been working. We are hopeful that the land sale and donation will be completed within the near future. …
Harry A. Swanson
Manager, Field Service
American Oil Company Chicago, Illinois
A PLEA FOR RESTRAINT
Sir: … At various times in the past twenty-five years I have joined and supported organizations devoted to “conservation.” I have found, to my sorrow, that most of the people (and organizations) have exceedingly narrow interests and little interest or understanding of conservation. Therefore, although we must pursue conservation and preservation with increased vigor, it is imperative that we also devote considerable effort toward teaching our people what conservation is …
Above all, we have to inspire great numbers of people to “put their money where their mouth is.” … It has been my observation that hunters are the only single group who have been willing to spend considerable sums of money in support of conservation per se. All others lobby for the “government” to spend its money for their pet projects. Too many individuals and organizations spend far too much effort fighting other conservation and preservation activities and far too little … on actual projects of lasting value. …
I am not a hunter, fisherman, camper, or bird-watcher and have no personal interest in a “wilderness” area or the like.
I am concerned that there is a threat to the ecological balance which allows man to live. Once that balance is destroyed, we will not have an opportunity to recover. Until the exact point of danger is determined, it will be exceedingly wise to exercise restraint …
