Troubles arise when the past collides with the present, as illustrated by the controversies surrounding Grace Islet and James Island. These situations should teach us lessons about preventing more such collisions in the future.
The protests continue around Grace Islet, a small outcrop in Saltspring Island鈥檚 Ganges Harbour, on which Alberta businessman Barry Slawsky is building a luxury home. Slawsky bought the islet in 1990, planning to build a retirement home there. His plans were stalled when cairns and human remains were discovered in 2006. He says the evidence shows minimal human presence on Grace Islet, but one archeologist said he documented and photographed dozens of bones and cairns there. Slawsky has since obtained the required permits from provincial authorities to continue construction.
Protesters say the islet is an ancient First Nations burial place, and no construction should be allowed. The wide gulf between the two perspectives shows no sign of diminishing, although the province has met with local chiefs concerning the islet as they search for solutions.
In the latest confrontation, about two dozen protesters paddled or swam to the islet Tuesday, demanding government action, including a suggestion to compensate Slawsky and give protection to the islet.
The dispute over James Island stems from historical activity of a more recent vintage. The sa国际传媒 Supreme Court released a decision Tuesday that orders the island鈥檚 former owner to compensate the current owner for work removing contamination left when the island was an industrial site.
The 315-hectare island, located off the east side of the Saanich Peninsula, was used for manufacturing and storing explosives between 1913 and 1985. (About 19 million kilograms of TNT manufactured on the island was used by the Allies in the First World War.)
ICI sa国际传媒 Inc. (now known as PPG Architectural Coatings sa国际传媒 Inc.) took over the island in 1954 and owned it for more than three decades. In the late 1980s, working according to Environment Ministry standards of the time, ICI carried out remediation work in six areas, removing a variety of contaminants left by the explosives manufacturing. It sold the island in 1988.
The current owner, J.I. Properties, bought the island in 1994 and developed it into a private resort that includes an 18-hole golf course, a 5,000-square-foot house, a western-themed village and a conservation area. (The island is for sale for $75 million.)
By 2004, new environmental standards had come into effect, and J.I. Properties did more remediation. It then sought compensation from ICI, which objected, saying it had already done remediation to government standards. In Tuesday鈥檚 decision, Supreme Court Judge Nigel Kent said ICI was responsible for the cleanup, and ordered the company to compensate J.I. Properties to the tune of $4.75 million.
The disputes over the two islands might seem, at first glance, to have little in common, but they both concern problems that arise from activities that happened long ago. They show that we cannot brush these issues aside, but must deal with them. The sins of the fathers are truly visited upon subsequent generations.
When we examine the activities of our forebears through the lens of modern standards, our forebears often fall short. In some cases, people in the past were not aware that their activities would have consequences. In other cases, they simply didn鈥檛 care, enabled by the lack of standards and regulations at the time.
It might not be fair, but it is reality. To ignore the problems is to exacerbate them.
And it鈥檚 a lesson that we should step carefully. Protecting special places today is far easier and less costly than rescue efforts and remediation work tomorrow.
