POLLUTION OF BOUNDARY WATERS

The keynote of the final report of the International Joint Commission relative to the Pollution of Boundary Waters appears under the heading, “Inadequacy of Common Law.” This paragraph reads as follows: “When settlements had been made along our boundary waters to an extent that urban communities commenced to grow, and sewerage systems in consequence of this growth began to be installed, such was the immensity of these rivers that settlers living farther down stream probably neither noticed nor protested against the discharge into them of what was relatively an infinitesimal amount of pollution. When these communities, therefore, installed sewerage works, they took advantage of the diluting powers of the river, and resorted to the simple and inexpensive expedient of discharging into them their sewage in its raw condition. The custom of doing so has now become universal. The selfishness of vested interests, familiarity of evil conditions, which has begotten an indifference to both the doing and the suffering of wrong, an ill-directed spirit of economy averse to the assumption of financial burdens to remedy what was before regarded as an existing or potential evil to other communities, and the disinclination to change ingrained in humanity, have resulted in a situation along the frontier which is generally chaotic, everywhere perilous, and in some cases disgraceful. The common law having proved inadequate to the task of controlling affairs, it has been supplemented or superseded by legislative enactments, which in their practical workings have about as signally failed.”

A Delicate Problem.

It is to be observed from this that the Commission was entrusted with a most delicate problem, that of suggesting the nature of the international intervention where the custom of both countries had resulted in an invasion of common law and, as a further consequence, a direct contravention of treaty obligations. Section 7 of the conclusions of the Commission is probably the one of most vital interest today. This section is as follows: “In order to remedy and prevent the pollution of boundary waters, and to render them sanitary and suitable for domestic purposes and other uses, and to secure adequate protection and development of all interests involved on both sides of the boundary, and to fulfil the obligations , . . of the Treaty, it is advisable to confer upon the International Joint Commission ample jurisdiction to regulate and prohibit this pollution of boundary waters and waters crossing the boundary.” To appreciate fully what this recommendation involves, one is forced back to the premises from which this recommendation naturally follows. This is found in portion six of the final report, under the heading of “Limits of Permissible Pollution and Standards of Sewage Purification.” It appears to the writer that the Commission does not ask for authority to regulate as it may deem advisable—without limit—but that it recommends that some authority (itself appearing as the most natural) be clothed with power to regulate as consistent with the spirit of treaty obligations and in a manner consonant with their findings and conclusions.

Limits of Permissible Pollution.

To determine the extent of remedial treatment required in each particular case would involve consideration of the varied lines that have been followed by the Commission throughout the present enquiry; the existence of pollution and of harm, actual or potential, to domestic or other uses, to public health or property; the results of the engineering studies of feasible remedies; and the economic facts relating to the conservation of stream resources. It would require the balancing of the value of remedial measures in the terms of public good against the cost of the requisite improvements. On the one hand, it is evident that the paramount importance of public health and the binding obligations of the treaty must be borne in mind. These make impossible the recommendation of such lenient remedial measures as would work economic injustice or would endorse officially the continued spoliation of a natural resource to the injury of the citizens upon both sides of these waters.

Must Not Be Unreasonable.

On the other hand, sewage treatment requirements must not be made so excessive and unreasonable as to involve the cities and towns along these waters in an expenditure entirely unjustifiable. They should be reasonable and feasible from the standpoint of engineering construction or adaptability to local conditions, of the availability of necessary lands, of out-falls and incident structures, and of costs. In view of the fact that pollution in the Detroit and Niagara Bivers, and its transboundary effects therein, are much greater than in the other boundary waters, these two rivers will be treated in one class and the remaining boundary waters as another class. The problem of necessary bacterial purification of the sewage discharged into the two former is one of extreme perplexity, owing to the difficulty or impossibility of obtaining definite and ample data and the relative importance to be attached to many of the factors which enter into it. After a great deal of consideration, the Commission has, in view of all the circumstances of the case, come to the conclusion that for the present, and as an immediate step in the way of restoration of the purity of these streams, the communities responsible for the discharge of raw sewage into them should purify it to such an extent that the resulting average cross-sectional pollution in each river will not exceed the limit of safe loading for a water-purification plant. In other words, the standard of purification required of these communities should be such that the streams, after receiving their treated sewage, would have a mean annual cross-sectional average of B. coli not exceeding 500 per 100 c.c. Compliance with the requirements of this standard would not impose upon the riparian communities along these rivers discharging their sewage therein a burden which would be unreasonable or greater than that ordinarily imposed upon urban communities which purify their sewage.

Water Standard Tentative.

It necessarily follows that this standard of sewage purification, being based upon a tentative standard of safe loading of water-purification plants, must itself be tentative. The growing appreciation of sanitation, the consequent demand for a higher degree of purity in water supplies, and the constant improvement that is taking place in the processes of sewage treatment tend to make a proper standard of sewage purification one of ever-increasing stringency. The discovery of a new and much more economical, or possibly a profitable, method of disposal of sewage, for example, would naturally lead to the adoption of a stricter standard of permissible pollution in heavily polluted streams. Furthetmore, any limit of permissible impurity that might be established, even temporarily, for a given stream must be influenced largely by strictly local consideration. The data necessary for the formulation of a fixed standard, either of sewage purification or of water purification, are not sufficiently well established at the present time. By more precise methods of experimental study there will doubtless be obtained in the future a more ample and accurate command of facts, which will admit of the determination of a more definite standard.

Bacterial Standard Not Sufficient.

In view of the difficulties and uncertainties of bacteriological technique, it is distinctly advantageous to have, if possible, a working rule which is more accurate and readily determinable than the bacterial standard suggested. Professor Phelps, the consulting engineer, taking the results of the extensive investigations reported upon in the “Progress Report” as an index of the conditions actually existing, worked out, as will appear from his calculations on page 9 of his report to the Commission, such a rule or standard. He found that if the sewage of the cities be diluted in a stream flow to four cubic feet per second per capita of the population, the resulting water will contain approximately 500 B. coli per 100 c. c. If the dilution is proportionately less than this, a corresponding degree of purification of the sewage will be necessary to maintain the final stream condition. Further investigations will no doubt make possible a more accurate statement of these relations, but, as the entire matter of standards is always subject to revision in the light of accumulated knowledge, it is considered that for all purposes of a present enquiry, the practical equivalence of the dilution and the bacteriological standards may be accepted.

•Excrrpts from address delivered October 3, 1918, to the American Society of Municipal Improvements.

Standards for Boundary Rivers.

These standards are not applicable to rivers other than the Niagara and Detroit, but it is in no sense to be inferred, however, that remedial or protective measures are not required in their case, where the dilution, based upon the entire cross-section of the stream, exceeds in every instance four feet per second per capita of the population. The view of the advisory engineers is adopted that no untreated sewage should be discharged into boundary waters, but the Commission considers it inadvisable at the present time to prescribe what the amount of treatment should be in the case of these remaining rivers. The sewage from each community along their banks must be considered by itself in respect of the degree of purification that is necessary, basing the standard on the reasonable use of the waters, the practical possibilities of remedial and protective measures, the economic value of stream purification, and also the economic value of stream pollution, proper regard being had to the public health. After giving much attention to the question of standards of purification in these six boundary rivers, the Commission has come to the conclusion that the fixing of standards for them and the subsequent modifications of these standards, from time to time, should be left to some authority clothed with the necessary power to deal with the question. This authority should also have power to vary, from time to time as conditions demand, the standards of sewage purification in the Detroit and Niagara rivers. It is forced upon the writer’s attention that the finding of the Commission cannot but result in Federal interference both on the part of Canada and of the United States, for their finding in no uncertain language recites that treaty obligations have been violated, and the violation has imperiled public health and the property of both countries. It remains to be seen whether public sentiment of the two countries will be strong enough to override the petty interests of corporation, state and provincial executives, and succeed in expressing, through the authority of some international board of control, the unity of their interests; and by the restoration of our boundary waters to a state of purity natural to their present and future uses’, erecting a flaming and enduring beacon to guide us toward a better judgment of the obligations of modern civilization.

Water has been turned into the new main leading from the city reservoir, Philipsburg, Mont., to Broadwa -, and the city now has adequate protection from fire, and a water supply that will be sufficient for years to come, the residents believe.