From: | ZAP59@AOL.COM |
Date: | 16 Dec 1997 10:40:43 |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | Effects of expansion on Cape Cod |
No toxic expansion! I want to live here. December 12, 1997 Paul Zanis 26 Cove Road Forestdale MA 02644 Ms. Mimi McConnell Community Working Group P.O. Box 987 Barnstable MA. 02630 Dear MMR Community Working Group: The comments I am about to put forward come from over thirty years of watching training activities on Camp Edwards. In the 1960's training activities were minimal and the impact to the environment seemed to be minimal. The old rifle ranges were used. Camping was in out of the way places and the soldier population was low. Artillery fire took place only from a few positions and the impact area was sited in one spot-an ocean buoy just south of the five corners on Turpentine Road. In the 1970's the National Guard took over and I saw the first mechanized troops (tanks and personnel carriers). The number of soldiers increased dramatically and so did the impact on the environment. I saw tanks destroying the forest. A pond die. Munitions discarded. Open latrines and impact area expansion. A sort of lawlessness and total disregard for the land and environment took place. Then in the 1980's I witnessed the first official expansion. Hundreds of acres were cleared for no particular reason. The NGB walked away from the old ranges and built new ranges so more soldiers could shoot. New roads were built, tank trails, gravel roads to move more soldiers quicker. Archaeological sites were disturbed to make way for wider roads. All four corners of the impact area were now impacted by munitions. Concrete latrines were built incorrectly. Soldiers for the most part were unsupervised. I saw soldiers spraying the countryside with heavy machine guns. Shooting into the sky at seagulls-any target of opportunity, boulders and trees. Soldiers with explosives blowing up boulders, trees, railroad tracks, cars and ponds outside any designated demo area. Smoke and CS gas grenades all through the woods. Alcohol consumption was high. The National Guard became more mechanized, there was just too many soldiers training on this fragile environment. I saw soldiers from just about every state east of the Mississippi. I saw foreign soldiers in the early 1980's and they were back in the 1990's. I saw too many rifles spewing 90 trace gases and toxic chemicals. Lead,white phosphorous. Too many artillary guns and mortars spewing 70 trace gasses and cancer causing chemicals. DNT, TNT, RDX, cadmium, white phosphorous, PETN, lead azide. Too many smoke grenades with hexachoroethane-a cancer- causing chemical. Too many mechanized smoke generators spewing huge amounts of titanium tetrachloride. Too many soldiers using open latrines with no intentions of following the field manual 21-10. Too many nuclear, chemical and biological training exercises going on to close to houses. Too many portable radars radiating with unknown effects. Too many corporations given use of Camp Edwards to run their experiments and dump their toxins-defoliants, explosives and toxic solvents. The National Guard still calls Camp Edwards "isolated and remote." The Forestdale School is one mile from the center of the impact area, one quarter mile from rifle ranges and experimental explosives areas. Depleted uranium munitions may have been tested there. The nuclear, chemical and biological training area is one half mile from children playing. The National Guard Bureau wants to expand? SUMMARY As seen from the last expansion, training increased, realism decreased. One hundred and fifty plus units training is just too much for the environment to sustain. An army training for war is not environmentaly friendly. Training must cut back to camping and war games only or cease altogether. Cape Cod has paid its price to keep America free. Enclosed are studies and fact sheets. I have quite a photo catalog. I would like the opportunity speak to the Community Working Group and show my pictures. Sincerely, Paul Zanis | |
Prev by Date: EPA clarifies policy on Natural Attenuation Next by Date: Low Level Airspace | |
Prev by Thread: EPA clarifies policy on Natural Attenuation Next by Thread: Low Level Airspace |