Blog 5 - - - Section 23

23 – Controversy at Love Canal

It is very important to understand the complete impact of toxic chemicals in the environment. Choices made in the past can create serious problems in the present, causing the intervention from political and scientific communities. Determining the correct method of dealing with toxic chemicals sometimes is based on value more than environmental impact. Toxic substances are hard to recycle and store. Political influence can blur the actual impacts to nearby residents, or even to reuse the land as a safe site for public services, like a school at Love Canal. Toxic chemicals, produced by Hooker in this case, also have people running from responsibility/liability once a contamination occurs. Enforcing laws is very hard when the dumper and law maker were the initial source of the problem, as was the case in Niagara Falls. After substantial problems with local health in the community, the EPA became involved in 1978, almost 20 years too late. The cleanup effort consisted of home evacuation and relocation of resident most at risk. The study produced from the investigation, told residents that the area is safe. No one in the community bought the initial results, as signs of contamination were still present at the site. Unsatisfied by federal studies, local residents took it on their own to survey and identify people in the neighborhood suffering from similar symptoms, believed to be a result from the chemical in the ground. After compiling the data, it was able to show a geographical pattern, with the most effected people to be the closest to the dump site, and banks of the old canal. The results made a positive linear increase in birth defects, compared to homes further away from the banks. The independent study took the likely hood of this occurrence to be “chance” done to .001%. Such birth defects range from serious to mild cases, all of which were occurring at a abnormally high rate, when compared to other neighborhoods. It also gave enough proof to show there was still a contamination and chemical leaking in the area, despite the federal investigation. Surprisingly the controversy was between the community and the health department, and not between the sources of the problem, Hooker Chemicals. The community felt cheated by the public health service. The public health service has a lot to consider for the solutions to the problem at Love Canal. The public health service was delaying to avoid paying out even more than Love Canal itself; there were other sites around the state with the same problem that would demand a payout as well, if a payout was received here. Delaying would make it someone else’s problem as well. The two sides were unable to understand each other’s goals, only adding to the anger from the residents. Information was gathered by one source, the state of New York, putting quality and influence on certain aspects at question. Federal intervention was required to provide an equal and proper study to be conducted. The state became dissident and ignored minority opinions, along with harassment and demotion to keep data consistent, even if it turns out to be false data. Openness of scientific knowledge was compromised, files were hidden and not peer reviewed to establish the validity of the study. There were also no equal attempts at resolving the controversy because the health department responsible for all the data collected refused to acknowledge the deviation from their findings as true, there needs to be an understanding of the problem by both sides, so an actual solution can be made. These problems had two failed attempts at trying to challenge the states data. Following this actions, the state was charged by Senator Thomas Bastosiewicz with everything from withholding information from the public, to manipulation of information to minimize potential health risks. Overall this shows the importance of proper scientific studies, such as openness to data, multiple levels of community involvement, and funds should empower the community to choose their own researcher, all of these points prevent state manipulation.


This article brought up good points about manipulation of the government and power. Having people responsible for investigating their own mistakes and deciding whether or not to pay out from their own pocket never works. Third party investigation is necessary to avoid bias in the information provided and collected. This was a valuable lesson learned by the residents and communities in the area. A restructuring would only benefit the tax payer, and prevent a similar situation from happening again.