A6 -The Oakville Beaver, Wednesday, April 3, 2002 EDITORIALS AND LETTERS T H EIIAktllM IIK M I! 467 Speers Rd,, Oakville Ont. L6K 3S4 (905) 845-3824 Fax; 337-5567 Classified Advertising: 845-2809 Grculation: 845-9742 IAN OLIVER Publisher NEIL OLIVER Associate Publisher TERI CASAS Office Manager JILL DAVIS Editor in Chief MARK DILLS Production Manager KELLY MONTAGUE Advertising Director RIZ1ER0 VERT0LL1 Photography Director STEVE CR0Z1ER Cinrulation Director ROD JERRED Managing Editor THE OAKVILLE BEAVER IS PROUD OFFICIAL MEDIA SPONSOR FOR: U r t t M fVrtmj P iM h rg & D o ttiirg LM ra u d e 6 8c*n frfcu rc t Ertrrcm Oaraon Bumgtn Po*. etrtrgton 9^oc0ng O f P » trt G *v«ooaV £ia 9i Ccmecfcn Eat W b n **o a te C a rtry t a l a EfcbccM GuanMfl. Ftartorcugn Potf Georgetown Buuntn Firm & g s m TNi Wa*. imdMy Thn Wwfc. WirVum Economa & Sir. Udtatftottingjsrvw Mnot Milton Canadian O w p v n . MBfcn 3>«<ong »«w i Mttocuioa Buorma Virm . Nfcwaaupi N «* . H xan* Guide. Newnwfcet/Auroro Era Bonn*. Norsxrtwianj Nmn Norm «xk U n a . OaMto B « i « Onto* Stco*Q N*mt OWtiman Hockey N » « , CWto OMwvwtWirttJV'OonnoJon Port Pwrjr IN# Wrtfc. Own Samd Trtune. Palmornton Otarwx PMvtmugh Tha Week, Ptton County Curtr. ftcnmond i**mxn**Vautfon LtMOri. Scutwriujfi Mncr. SKufMfeUt&tiQr TrtXfw F « M r voma Q y of tok Ouartaan Recognized for Excellence by O ntario C om m unity N n w p ijx r s Association . C aiudU n G xn m u n lty N n n w m A s s o d *to o i i n in in H jK S P P O C* © 0rfT Oah'Hh ^yht'ariX'. \1 1 7 .5 ? loaKvllle galleries | M BK S K * 4 Suburban N m rs p ip m o f America fW BUSW SSW CaiEN Ct The end of a royal era The passing of Queen Mother, or the " Queen Mum " as she was affectionately referred to by her many loyal followers, marks the end of an era for the British monarchy. She was bom in 1900 at a time when England was a major world power and the British Royal Family was revered by all their loyal subjects at home and abroad. A lot has changed since then. While Britain still wields economic and military power in the world, it can hardly be called dominant. And as for the Royal Family, its mem bers have become editorial fodder for the tabloids fueled by scandals, divorce and the public improprieties of its members. But the Queen Mum was different. Despite the fallen status of the Royal Family in recent years, the Queen Mum was still held in high esteem by all around her. Her fans and followers were legion; her critics non-existent. Perhaps it was her enchanting genuine nature which appealed to people. Perhaps it was her ever-present smile, her genuine love of life. O r maybe it was her gentle toughness they admired. In her lifetime, she weath ered many a storm with grace and digni ty She was thrust into power alongside her husband King George the V I in 1936 following the scandalous abdication of his older brother Edward V III. As the reluctant monarch. King George relied heavily on the support of his wife through trying times. In World War II, with the Battle of Britain waging in the air above and her safety endangered the Queen Mother refused to abandon her subjects for safe refuge in Canada. Her insistence to stay was a major boost to the morale of the British people and endeared her to them forever after. Following the death of her husband, the Queen Mother continued her duty in support of her daughter Queen Elizabeth II. Over the years, she visited Canada several times and was welcomed by mil lions. Her passing was marked with sadness across the country. How well was she loved by Canadians? Perhaps the best example was shown in Edmonton, where thou sands of Oiler fans rose to their feet to sing "God Save the Queen" rather than the traditional "O Canada" at the begin ning of the Saturday night hockey game. The Queen Mother w ill be missed. We shall not likely see another like her this century. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Anti-pesticide groups throw up smokescreens Re; "Beware o f pesticide ban" -- my let ter Oakville Beaver, March 20 and Anti Pesticides letters Oakville Beaver March 27. The anti-pesticides letters contain the kind of classic unreliable statements about pesti cides that various "Environmental" organiza tions (pick one) have been promoting for some time. I have a one-inch thick folder from the sources mentioned in my previous letter and could fill pages of your newspaper with rebut tal. I shall try not to abuse space, but those sources include commentary from a host of Academics. Environmental Biologists, Toxicologists. Physicians and scientists as well as the P M R A (Pest Management Regulatory Agency - Health Canada). 1. It is charged that only 1% of a pesticide reaches its intended target. (That assertion comes from a World W ild life Fund Discussion paper issued in 1994). That figure of 1% was based on what hit an insect. That actually is true -- but it is irrelevant! W hy is it irrelevant? It is irrelevant because in agri culture pesticides are designed to protect plants and animals, so it is the portion of the pesticide that lands on the plant or animal that is important, not what lands on the pest. That figure varies but is quite high. The companion charge is that "The remainder is dispersed to the environment" -- that is true, but the charge implies widespread dispersal when, in fact, it is limited to the area of application. That I % statement is now interpreted to apply to all pesticides. So is that a valid argu ment? No. but if repeated often enough it gathers a life of its own. 2. The argument is that the PCPA (Pest Control Products Act) has not been reviewed since it was passed in 1969 -- what is implied here and what we are supposed to believe is that for that reason it is no longer effective. Well quite the contrary, the PM R A has not been hindered by any lack of renewal of the PCPA. You have heard it said: "Don't fix what ain't broke." Gerald R. Stephenson. Professor. Department of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, writing in the Guelph Mercury has this to say: "Before scientists in Canada's PM R A . Health Canada, approve the registration of a pesticide for use in landscape areas, they have to be convinced there is a wide margin of safety for users of those areas. Beginning in the I960's. health and environ mental scientists have carefully developed a nearly formidable number of chemical, envi ronmental and health-related studies that are required for the pesticide approval process. The cost of this research is now approximate ly $100 million for each chemical." And Dr. Keith Solomon. Director of the Centre for Toxicology, University of Guelph, writing in another publication has this to say: "Pesticides are probably the most tested and closely regulated substances in Canada today. An entire agency in Ottawa, not to mention a host of provincial regulators, oversee their approval, their movement in commerce, who may use them, where and when they may be used." Does that sound like a slipshod operation? More smokescyen right? Read on. here is what the PM R A itself has to say: "Every effort is made by the PM R A to ensure that pesticides to be registered or to be re-registered following the re-evaluation for use in Canada do not pose unacceptable health risks to infants, children, and the unborn. In addition, whenever scientific approaches emerge that can enhance the PM R A 's assessment process, especially where children's exposure is concerned, the Agency integrates this new knowledge into pesticide risk assessments. We do not need to amend the legislation to include these new scientific requirements." We w ill always demand the best for our children. But the agency can hardly be seen as being negligent. A B ill to enact a new PCPA was recently introduced in Parliament. That is good. But no problem, the PM R A and the industry have been meeting or exceeding most of the new regulations for many years. Now what about herbicides? Herbicides, of which 2-4D is the best known seem to be the biggest anti-pesticide target. But what is 2-4D? It is an organic acid which, if ingested, is quickly metabolized and passed through the body. It does not accumulate in the body or the environment. For these reasons, it is of insignificant risk to animals or humans, including children. There are many things that we use in our daily lives that we don't even think about, yet which do represent some risks. For instance, our bodies can not func tion without a certain level of salt -- yet, we can hold enough salt in our hands to kill us. Weight for weight, caffeine is between 25 to 50 times more toxic than some of the most commonly used herbicides. So can we trust the anti-pesticide lobby? Are the "Environmental" organizations lead ing us down the garden path (no pun intend ed)? What do you think? If we are supposed to be skeptical of our government agencies and pesticides, we must be equally skeptical about the other side. So what about the joint release by the Sierra Club and the Canadian Cancer Society on March I ? I have some big questions because in the information that I have, study after study has not established a link between Cancer and Pesticides. And by the way, since World War II, which might be termed the "pesticide era" life expectancy in North America has increased by 20 years! What are we to make of Loblaws' decision to phase out the sale of chemical pesticides? (See an excellent article about this in the National Post Online. March 22). Firstly, Loblaws is in the grocery business, not the pesticides products business. We can guess that their move w ill hardly make any differ ence to their "bottom line" or to the availabil ity and use of chemical pesticides. Secondly, their decision is curious. Go into their stores. You w ill see their shelves stocked with numerous products that bear "Hazard" warn ing labels. We know many common ones including Lysol, Tincture of Iodine and Brasso. Some of these even display the skull and crossbones symbol and most are within easy reach of children and toddlers. Let me clarify that I am a retired citizen of Oakville. I am not now. nor have I ever been connected with the pesticides, chemical or lawn care industries nor any regulatory agency. Oh, Oh, I just had to change my printer cartridge. The pamphlet with the new car tridge cautions me "Ink may be harmful if swallowed, avoid contact with eyes." Maybe. I should stop using my printer and start writ ing by hand. But then the ink in my ball-point pen may be potentially harmful as well. I apologize for the length of this letter and thank you for your indulgence in printing it. Three cheers for MOMS hockey championships You couldn't have placed a more appropriate photo graph on the front page of the Wednesday, March 27 edi tion. Anyone who has experienced the thrill to view or participate in the annual M O M S championship games for House League Hockey in Oakville over the years can relate to the cover photo of both teams celebrating their accomplishments together on the ice with the whole league watching and applauding. Your newspaper does an excellent job in showcasing our fine Rep A. A A . and A A A teams throughout the hock ey season. These players, coaches, managers, trainers and parents should be acknowledged for the countless hours of travel to games, practices, out of town tournaments and provincial playdowns that they participate in each season to represent Oakville in a fine manner throughout the Province of Ontario. It is important to note that the vast majority of boys and girls who play organized hockey in Oakville are in the House League system. Most players play one game a week and practice once a week. Many of them do not play in outside tournaments and play for the love of the game. Anyone can join a team, and it is great to see how a play er's' skill, knowledge and love of the game grows through out the season. The M O M S championship week is their chance to shine. Ask any player, friend, parent or relative who has viewed this exciting week of games from the paperweight to midget divisions and you w ill understand that if you win or lose on championship night it is still something that you w ill never forget. Let's take a moment to thank all of those involved in organizing and running the annual M O M S hockey week for our Minor Oaks Hockey Association (M .O .H .A.) House league teams. A special thank you should also go to Wayne Moorehead and the rest of the M .O.H.A. volunteers for their countless hours to oversee the fine House League Hockey program that we have here in Oakville. It seems that we are so quick to look at what is wrong with minor hockey. We should sit back once in a while, smile, and reflect on what is right with it! M IKE HARTNETT C o u n c illo rs s h o u ld su p p o rt p e s tic id eb a n Ed. note: This letter was originally sent to Ward 2 councillors Linda Hardacre and Fred Oliver, and a copy was filed with The O akville B eaver for publication. The Canadian Cancer Society has issued a formal state ment which reads as follows. "The Canadian Cancer Society does not support the use of carcinogenic chemical pesticides for cosmetic purposes. We accept that there is convincing evidence that some commonly used pesticides are carcinogens and we would like to see a ban on the use. for cosmetic purposes of chemicals that have been desig nated by the IA R C as known or probable carcinogens." (International Agency for Research into Cancer - World Health Organization) As an elected representative of the people of Oakville, we are asking you to pay attention to this statement. If you choose to ignore it, are you willing to take responsibility for the consequences? What if one more child in Oakville has to suffer because of Leukemia or a brain tumour, and it might have been prevented? We are requesting that you do everything in your power to impose an immediate ban on cosmetic pesticides on both public and private lands in the Town of Oakville. B.D . HAUSER Pud IT S BECAUSE SO ID EM I5H AD M H .E/TR A DAY OFF ig>ATCHR lSW & ' By STEVE NEASE IFYO UH IM You can 3UST MAKE IT. AND BY THEW AY- JOHN AND KAREN SANDFORD