[CPEO-MEF] Sustainable Range Management - a community view at APG

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

from Cal Baier-Anderson <cbaie001@umaryland.edu>

Hi Lenny-

I read both your and Ray Clark's papers on encroachment (available on
the CPEO website). I particularly liked the way that you link
encroachment with sustainable range management. But I do have a few
comments on the problems associated with sprawl.

First of all, the issue of sprawl (while an important one in and of
itself) is spurious to the problems of military contamination. Sprawl
does not cause the military to release contaminants into the
environment. The military cannot be allowed to deflect responsibility
for its actions by raising issues of sprawl. We have to be mindful when
discussing the problem of sprawl to correctly partition blame.

Second, at the Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), there is a strong
political movement to open APG boundary areas for joint-use. The idea is
to create a center for high tech and other commercial enterprises to
co-exist with the military tenants. This will, in effect, create a
mini-city, and off-post boundary development will follow. Even without
the joint-use proposal, many civilians work at APG and want to live
close to where they work. They should not have to sacrifice their health
and well being for this right to choose where they live.

The "who was here first" argument can also result in the deflection of
responsibility. It does not matter is there is one family living
adjacent to a military fence or 100 families. Contamination resulting
from testing and training must be kept in check.

Therefore, I think it is the responsibility of the military to ensure
that they have an adequate buffer zone between their testing and
training areas and the adjacent communities. Ray Clark had several good
suggestions for both the military and regional authorities. Additionally
I would add that buffer zones must be routinely monitored (air, water,
soil, sediment), with the data made available to the public. This data
can be used to demonstrate that the military is being a good neighbor.
It can also be used to identify and address potential problems before
they reach the adjacent community.

Has anyone picked up on your call for a dialogue on sustainable range
management? I would be very interested in this. At APG many of the major
cleanup issues have been or are being addressed (by major, I mean large
chemical and munitions dumps, extensive groundwater contamination,
off-post groundwater contamination, etc.).

Many of the contamination problems that remain are on active ranges -
which raises all sorts of issues. How much remedial action do you do,
knowing that the area will be used for testing and training? What are
the cumulative impacts of historic and current testing and training? Can
we effectively integrate CERCLA and RCRA to obtain comprehensive
information? How can we define the boundary areas to limit use?

We are now seeing the confluence of these major issues. Sustainable
range management seems like it would be a natural framework to begin to
address these multifaceted issues.

Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D. (technical advisor to APGSCC)
<cbaie001@umaryland.edu>
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Program in Toxicology


-- 


Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 222B View St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
lsiegel@cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~