The article [“The Green Scene: Getting Off the Banks,” July 28 Xpress] could have done a better job in showing our human health linkages to the French Broad. The French Broad River is a drinking water source to over 1 million people. Not only does Western North Carolina draw water directly but so do people of eastern Tennessee. Furthermore, there may be an upper economic class who only catch and release, but the people who have little money use the river as a supplemental source of food. No one is posting or communicating to the population that is consuming [the fish], nor is the media collecting quotes from those people about their connection to the river.
— Phillip Gibson
Candler
Green Scene Reporter Susan Andrew’s response: Gibson, the former French Broad Riverkeeper, makes a good point, and although no one knows how many do it, there’s little doubt that some folks eat their catch from the French Broad. (I was interested in Manderson’s carefully qualified statement that he does — but only occasionally.)
But if it’s true that no one is communicating about the potential health effects directly to those who consume either fish or river water, then I think the central question raised in this article still stands: Are the regulatory agencies doing their job? Why can’t the agency investigate any potential source of pollution, for example, if it seems warranted?
Before you comment
The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.