TRAIL SMELTER QUESTION - International Joint Commission

TRAIL SMELTER QUESTION
REFERENCE OF CERTAIN COMPLAINTS ARISING
FROM THE OPERATION OF THE SMELTER AT
TRAIL, B.C.,
TO
AN INTERNATIONAL
TRIBUNAL
FOR ADJUDICATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS
OF
A CONVENTION BETWEEN CANADA
AND THEUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WHICH
WAS SIGNED ATOTTAWA,
THE I ~ T H APRIL, 1935,
AND RATIFIED ATOTTAWA, THE ~ R AUGUST,
D
1935
STATEMENT
STATEMENT
OF
FACTS
SUBMITTED
BY THE
AGENT
THEGOVERNMENTOFCANADA
MAY 3, 1936
OTTAWA
J. 0. PATENAUDE, I.S.O.
PRINTER TcO T H E KING'S MOST EXCELLENTMAJESTY
1936
FOR
THETRAIL
SMELTER QUESTION
STATEMENT OF FACTSSUBMITTED BY THEAGENT
FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA
PART 1-INTRODUCTION
1. TheTrailSmelterquestion,whichhas
been submittedtothisTribunal for a,djudication,resultsfrom
comp1aint)s that damageisbeingcaused
to vegetationintheState
of Washingtonbysulphurdioxidegas.Thisgas,
whose chemicalformulais
SO2, resultsfromtheroasting
of sulphur-bearing
ores, and is released into the atmosphere
as waste from the stacks
of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company
of Canada, Limited, at Trail, British
Columbia.Whentheairdriftis
down theriverfromTrail,
i t follows the
well-defined valley of theriver,andit
isalleged that it crosses theinternationalboundaryline,
a t a pointabout elevenmiles from Trail,at sufficient
strength to cause damage in the State
of Washington.
The Trail Smelter was originally built and
owne'd by United States interof this
ests. It was acquiredbya'CanadianCompanynearthebeginning
centuryandcameintothehands
of the'ConsolidatedMiningandSmelting
Company of Canada, Limited, in 1906.
During the period of the operation of the Trail Smelter by United States
interests,anothersmelterwasinoperationintheColumbiaRivervalley,
at
Northport,Washington.Bothsmelters
were roastingandsmelting
ores from
theRossland,British
IColumbia,copper-goldmines.
TheNorthportSmelter
continuedtooperateintermittentlyuntilaftertheWorldWar
of 1914-1918.
It was dismantle,dshortlyafterwards.
Prior to the establishment of these smelters there was no settlement, agricultural or otherwise,between NorthportandTrail;buttheconstruction
of
the smelters resulted in the settlement
of the Columbia valley a t bothpoints.
The 'Columbia valley has never,
at any time, been adistinctivelyagricultural
district, but throughout the period
of its settlement it has been a smelter area.
Theoperations
of theTrailSmelterhave
been practicallycontinuous,
butthey were conducted on arelativelysmallscaleuntilthedemandfor
metals during the World War led to an increase in output. This, however, was
not so extensive as to lead to any complaints
of damage from residents of the
State of Washington.
During 1925 and 1926 furtherincreasesinproduction
were ma'de,and,
consequently, more sulphur dioxide was wasted into the air, and, by reason
of
theunusualconformation
of thevalley,andthespecialatmosphericconditions prevalent, was carried from time
t o time down the Columbia valley into
the State of Washington. It iscommonground that in the years 1926 t o 1930
13847-lt
4
T R A I L S M E LI'ER--STATEMl3'NT
OF FACTS
inclusive, some damage was caused in that Statr: by fumigations emnnating from
theTrailSmelter,buttheextent
of theinjuryanditsevaluationinmonetary terms have been indispute.
2. The first suggestion t<hat injury was
being caused in the State of Washof 1925,
ington,byfumesfromtheTrailSmelter,cameinthelateAutumn
from Mr. J. H. Stroh. It was not until the Autumn
of 1926 that Mr. Stroh or
anyotherpersonfromtheState
of Washingtonmadeaclaim
for damages.
Claims were t'hen ma,de to the company, and an investigation was commenced,
resultinginfriendlysettlementsbyagreementwit'hmost
of theclaimants.
This coursecontinuedforabouttwoyears.
It wasbroughttoanendbythe
organization of the farmers and property owners
of the area involved into the
Citizens'ProtectiveAssociation.
Ordinarily,therearetwomethodsavailabletoindustrialenterprisesfor
dealingwiththeproblempresentedbysulphurdioxidefumigations.
I n practicallyallcountriesitispossiblefortheenterprisetoacquirethelands
affected or easementsbyprivatetreatywiththeowners.Inmanycountries,
the right of eminent domain is available for the compulsory acquisition of smoke
easements. In the present case, owing to the fact that the enterprise was located
in one country, and the injured property in the other, eminent domain was not
available.Voluntarypurchgsewasprecludedbyaprovision
of theConstitutionalLaw of theState of Washington, which preventedtheacquisition
of
lands or any interest in land by an alien corporation,
or even by a Washingtoncorporation of which thesharecontrolwasinalienhands.Consequently,
the company could not negotiate with the owners
for the purchase of lands or
of smokeeasementsoverlands,andthusprovideajustandpermanentsolution of the problem. The policy of settlingannuallyfortheseason'sdamage,
if any,had been made impossible bytheclaimants, as abovementioned.
In
thesecircumstancestheclaimantsrequestedthe
interventtion of their Government.
3. The
United
States
'Government
inkrvened
through
the
diplomatic
channels. The firstactiontakenwasacommunicationfromtheUnitedStates
Consul GeneralatOttawa,
in June, 1927. There cnsued B diplomatic correspondence,resultinginareference
of the question to the International Joint
Commission.
It may beobserved thatthismatter was neitheradisputebetweenthe
two #Governments, nor a claim by United States citizens against the 'Canadian
Government. It did not, and does not, come withinany of the ordinary categories of internationalarbitration.
It wasacasein
which a Canadian corporation,carryingon,inBritishColumbiaandelsewhere,anordinarylegitimateindustrialundertaking,wasalleged
t o be committing a privatewrong,
oraseries
of privatewrongs,againstmorethanoneUnitedStatescitizenin
the State of Washington,involvingrecurrent,butnotcontinuinginjury.
It was open to the Canadian 'Government,, a t all times, to treat the problem
asamatter
for redressinthelocalCourtsinBritishColumbia,todisclaim
internationalresponsibilitty,andtoremittheclaimantstotheirordinary
IegaI
remedies. Such a course could
not have been questioned, because it would have
been inaccordancc
with accopted principles of International Law.
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF PACl'S
5
The United States Government proposed that the question
a t issueshould
bereferredtotheInternationalJointCommission.TheCana,dianGovernment appreciated the practical difficulties that would result from standing u p m
astrictlegalisticposition.
It wasrecognized that the methods available under
a view to
existing treaties between the two countries should
beexplored,with
obtainingafriendly,neighbourly,andfairsolutiontotheproblem.
Accordingly,ajointgovernmentalreferencetotheInternational,Joint'Commission
wasmade on the7thAugust,
1928, pursuanttotheprovisions
of Article 9
of the Boundary Waters Treaty
1909.
Article 9 of the Boundary Waters Treaty 1900 reads as follows:TheHighContractingPartiesfurtheragreethatanyotherquestions
or matters of difference arisingbetween them involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either in relation to the other
or to the inhabitants of
theother, along the commonfrontierbetweentheUnitedStatessndthe
Dominion of Caniada, shall be referred from time to time to the International
Joint 'Commission for examination and report, whenever either the Government of the United States or the Government of the Dominion of Canada
shall request t,hat such quest,ions or matters of difference be so referred.
TheInternationalJointCommission
is authorizedineachcase
SO
referred t o examine into and report upon the facts and
circumstjances of the
particularquestionsandmattersreferred,togetherwithsuch
c,onclusions
andrecommendationsasmaybeappropriate,subject,however,toany
restrictions or exceptions which may be imposed with respect thereto by the
terms of the reference.
Such reports of the ICommission shall not be regarded as decisions of
so submittedeither on the fsacts or the law, and
the questions or matters
shall in no way have the character
of an arbitral award.
The Commission shall make a joint report to both Governments in all
cases in which all or a majority of the (Commissioners agree, land in case of
disagreement the minority may make
a joint report to both Governments,
or separate reports to their respective Governments.
I n case the (Commission is evenly divided upon any question
or matter
referred to it for report, separate reports shall
be made by the Commissioners on each side to their own Government.
The t,erms of reference werc embodied in a communication from the
Secretary of State of the United States to the Comnlission, dated 7th August,
1928,
inwhich
the following questions were referredforexaminationandreport,
togetherwithsuchrecommendationsastheCommissionmight
deem it appropriate to make.
1. Extent to which property in State of Washington has been damaged
by fumes from smelter at Trail, British Columbia.
2. Theamount of indemnitywhich would compensateUnitedStates
interests in the State of Washington for past damages.
3. Probable effect inWashington of future operations of smelter.
4. Method of providingadequateindomnityfordamagescausedby
future operations.
5 . Anyotherphase
of problemarisingfromdriftingfumesonwhich
Commission deems it proper or necessary to report and make recommendations in fairness to all parties concerned.
4. I n agreeing
cedure,underArticle
tothe referencc theGovernments were following t,he pro9 of theBoundaryWa,tersTreaty,
190'9, whichwas
6
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
designed' t o effect thejustandequitabledisposition
of suchquestion,s.While
not,technically,an
" award,"
thereport
of the Commissioncarriedwith
the
itweight
of unanimous
a
decision of competent
a
and
impartial
commission,
accustomed
to
acting
judicially.
Extensive
investigations
were
madebygroups
of scientists,reprwentingthetwo'Governments,in
1928,
1929, and 1930, and
also
by
independent
groups
of experts
acting
on
behalf of the
company.
Hearings
were
held
Northport,
at
Washington,
on
October 9 and 10, 192828; a t Washington, D.C., February 21, April 2, 12, 13, and
'22,19329; a t Nelson, on November 4, 1929; and again a t Washington, D.C., from
January 22 to February 12, 1930. Atthesehearings,theclaimants,theCompany,andthetwoGovernmentswererepresentedby
counsel, andtcstimony
of ellaimants, of scientists appointed by the two )Governments and by the Companyand of otherwitnesses,washeard.TheCommissionsoughttheadvice
and assistance of two independent investigators, Dean Howes of the University
of Alberta,andD'eanMiller
of theUniversty
of Idaho, whoconducted
an
investigation in the field, in
1929. There was oral argument by
counsel for the
claimants, for the (Company and the two *Governments, and printed briefs were
filed. Followingthehearings,theCommissionhadanumber
of executivesessions and ultimately embodied its recommend:Ltions in a unanimous report dated
the 28th February, 19311, givingdefiniteanswerstothequestions.TheReport
is set forth in Appendix A 3 .
In the course of the proceedings before the lnternational Joint Gommission,
theClaimantsandtheGovernment
of theUnitedStatesstronglyurgedthat
there should be abatement of the alleged nuisance by the lessening of sulphur
dioxide output at the smelter. The ,Company's Research Department had made
great progress in the development of methods for extracting sulphur dioxide
at
thestacks,andan
extensiveremedialprogramwasplanned.
Atthehearings,
Mr. S. G.Blaylock,Vice-presidentandGeneralManager
of theCompany,
informed the Commission that the Company was prepared to construct sulphuric
acid plants for the recovery at, the stacks of from 3'0 to 35' per cent of the total
sulphur dioxide output.Fertilizerplants
were projected to provide for disposal of the acid. The
cost of thetotalremedialprogram,asthenestimated,
was 9b'9,000,00~0.
This program was referred .by the ,Commission to Dr. G. L. Oldright, Supervising Engineer of the United Stlates Bureau of Mines, who was asked to study
and comment on Mr. Blaylock's project, and he gave a most favourable report
t o the Commission a t ahearinginWashingt>on;April
22, 1929. He character" anearnestengineeringefforttosolvetheproblem."
He
ized theprojectas
stated that the Company in undertaking the project was doing
everybhing that
could then be done to reduce thc emission of sulphur dioxide to t.he atmosphere.
Recommendations thattheCompanyshould
proceed withandcomplete
the project were embodied in the Report of the Commission. It should be noted,
however, that the ICompanydid notawaittherecommendationsoftheCommission or their acceptance by the Governments before proceeding with the
constructionandcompletion
of t'he remedilal works.Constructionwas
commenced
andcarried on duringtheinquirywitha
view toeliminatinginjuryatthe
!
TRAIL SMELTER-STATEMENT
OF FACTS
7
earliest possib'le moment.Th,eComlpanyhasexpendedmorethantenmillions
of dollars on the construction of these works and in this matter it was largely
influenced by the general approval of the United States Government expert and
of the (Commission.
5. Accordingly, it becomes necessary to consider the Report which embodied
theunanimousrecommendations
of aCommissionofsixmembers,including
of America,andthreeCanadisns.Appenthreecitizens of theUnitedStates
dix A 3.
TheReport of the Commissionwasbasedupon
theasssumptionthatthe
remedial works undehaken by the Company would be completed by the end
of
theyear 1931. It prescribedarationalandpracticaldefinition
of damage,
and required that damage, as defined, should cease.
It was tentatively assumed
that damage asdefined would be ended by the operation of the proposed remedial
works, but.provisionwasmadeforfurtherremedialaction
if it proved t o be
necessary. It was recognized there remained the poss'ibility of occasional injury,
and provision was made for compensation.
Accordingly, the Report embodied in effectthe following recommendations:( a ) The territory affect.ed wa,s found within the three zones plotted by Dr.
Hedgecock, and which will be found in the Map Book (Map No. 2 ) .
( b ) The assessment of damages up to the end
of the year 1931 was made,
and set at.9b350,000.
(c) The Company was required to continue with the constructionof remedial
works, as planned, and to construct further works if necessary, to reduce
the out,put of sulphur dioxide to t'he point where it would do no damage
in the United States.
( d ) While it was expected t'hat the proposed works would eliminate damage
in the State of Washington, it was necesslary t o provide for an inquiry,
inordertoascertainwhethertheywere
sufficient f'or t h a t purpose.
Accordingly, it was recommended that the Governments should appoint
scientists for the purpose of making an investigation, but the question
was t,o be determined by the Governments.
( e ) The word damage " was delfined as including such damage as the two
for
Governmentsmightdeemappreciable,butnotto
include-except
purposes of compensation-occasional damage that might be caused by
or by reason of
fumes being carried across t.he boundary in air-pockets,
unusual atmoslpheric conditions.
( f ) It was recommendmed t,hatcomplaintsfordamagein
1932 a,ndsubsequent, years should be adjusted, in the first instance, by the Company;
_.
and, uponfailure tomakesuchanadjustment,,bytheGovernments.
is) Recommendations wereincludedwithregard
toallot,mentand
distribution of individual awards.
( h ) Claims in respect to U. S. Government lands were rejected.
(i) Claim8sof Stevens County, in respect to propert'y o'wned by the County,
were admitted; but the claim by t,he County, baseduponallegedloss
of taxes, was rejected as
bcing toorcmoteandindefinitetopermit
of
adjudication.
(L
8
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
(j) Claimsbaseduponalleged
loss of trade by businessmen, or loss of
clientele or income by professional men in Northport, were rejected
as
being too remote and indefinite to permit of adjudication.
6 . I n dealing with the fourth question, which concerned the method
of providing adequate indemnity for damages caused by future operations, the International Joint Commission provided that complaints be made to the Company and
set,tled by agreement between the Company and complainant,s, or, failing agreeNo complaints were made, and Canadian interests
ment,byt'heG0vernment.s.
concerned andtheCanadianGovernmentfelt
justifiedinassuming
thatno
damage occurred in the State of Washington after the commencement of the year
1932. It was taken for granted that if damage was caused at. any time to any
individual, he would make
his complaint and give the Company a fair
opportunity to examine the injury and to make an
offer for settlement by agreement.
The Government, of the United States did not question any of the provisions
1933, there was a renewal
of this Report for more than two years. In February,
ofdiplomaticcorrespondence,andin*June
of that year the Government
complained to the Canadian Government that the Smelter was continuing to cause
injury in the St,ate o'f Washington.
No definite specific complaint t h a t wouldgive toCanadianinterestsan
opportunity for examination and assessment, was made a t a n y time.
The Canadian Government, therefore, assumed in the absence
of any complaint3 in 1932 and of any complaint of specific damage capable of being investigatedin 1933, t h a t nodamagewasbeingdoneinthoseyears,andmadeno
investigation of conditionsprevailing inthearea,otherthantocontinuethe
recording of concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere.
Therecordthusmaintained
sh.ows concentrationsduringtheyears
1932
and 1933 which were of such a character t,hat damage could not have occurred.
This inference is reinforced by the absence of economic damage in 1934 and 1935,
when gas concentrations were greater, and by the experimental evidence which
will be dealt with llater in this statement.
7. In February, 19133, the Government of the United States intimated that
conditions were not satisfactory, and commenced negotiations which ultimately
led to the conclusion of the present Convention, which was signed more than two
years later, on the 15th April, 1935. It would not be profitable t'o examine the
internationalcorrespondence or to recount the negotiations preceding the conclusion of theConvention.TherecommendationscontainedintheReport
of
the International Joint Commission were not accepte.d by the Government of the
UnitedStates,but
a new Conventionwasenteredintotoprovidefora
new
investigat,ion,leading uptoanadjudicationandpermanentsettlement
of the
Trail Smeker problem.
TRAIL SMELTER-STATEMENT
PART 11-THE
OF FACTS
9
ISSUES
8. The issues submitted to the Tribunal are set forth in Article
Convention, as follows:-
111 of the
The Tribunal shall finally decide the questions, hereinafter referred to
as '' t.he Questions," set forth hereunder, namely:( 1 ) Whether damage caused by the Trail Smelter in the State of Washington has occurred since the first day of January, 1932, and, if so,
what indemnity should be paid therefor?
(2) In the eventof the answer to the first partof the preceding Question
being inthe affirmative,whether
theTrailSmeltershouldbe
required to refrain from causing damage in the State of Washington
in the future and,if so, t o what extent.?
(3) I n t'he light of the answer to the preceding Question, what measures
or regime, if any, shouldbeadopted
or maintained by the Trail
Smelter?
(4) What indemnity or compensation, if any, should be paid on account
of any decision or clecisions rendered by the Tribunal pursuant to
the next twopreceding Questions?
It, will be observed that, the Tribunal is not concerned with damage which
occurred prior to the first day of January, 1932. The claimants are paid in full
for all such damage.
Under the first quest,ion, t,he Tribunal
is concerned wit'h the determination
1932,
of t.he question whether any damage has occurred since the 1st January,
and, if so, with the mea,surement of t'he compensation or indemnity which should
be paid for such damage.
The second question depends upon an affirmative finding to the first. Assuming that the tribunal has found t h a t damage has occurred, the further question
arises,whethertheTrailSmeltershould
be required t.o refrainfromcausing
damage in the State of Washington in the future, and, if so, t.0 what extent. It
is not suggested that an affirmative answer would involve t'he finding t h a t action
should be taken by the Smelter, apart from the payment
of compensation. It
willbefor
theTribunaltodetermine,
in theevent of an affirmativeanswer,
whetherthedamage
wliich is beingcaused, if' any, is casualdamagedueto
of' beingsatisfied by amonetary
specialatmosphericconditions,andcapable
payment; or whether such damage is so persistent and serious in its nature that
i t would be just to require remedial action.
The third question relates to the measures
or regime, if any, which should
Tmil Smelter.Thisquestion
is dependent
be adoptedormaintainedbythe
upon two things, an affirmative answer to t,he first question, and a finding under
so serious and
the secondquestiontothe
effect that the damage caused was
persistent t h a t remedial action was necessary.
I n such a case, it wouldbe for
the Tribunal to determine the measures or regime which must
be adopted.
10
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
The fourth question is the indemnihy or compensation which should be paid
on account of any
decisions rendered by the Tribunal, pursuant to the
second
and third quest,ions. The second and third quest,ions contemplate the possibility
of the recognition by the Tribunal that there may
be an area in the State of
Washington which will be subjected permanently to the possibility of occasional
injury. In this event, the Tribunal
would impress upon the area, and upon the
lands within that area, a permanent smoke easement which might require the
payment of a capital sum by way of permanent. compensation.
9. Thepresentstatement offers asurvey of the evidencefortheGovernment of Canada for the years 1932 t o 1935. This will include an examination of
the atmospheric conditions and consideration of the act,ion taken by the Company
in t,he construction of remedial works, in compliance with the recommendations
of the Commission. It willalso embodytheresults of the field investigations
of the cffcct of sulphur dioxideonforest, vegetation and crops and orchards in
the Northport area.
Evidence willalsobegiven
of researchconducted a t Summerland,British
Columbia, in 1931 and 1935.
Generally,theevidence
whichis
submitted discloses that noeconomic
damage, in any sense of the word, has occurred in the Stat.e
of Wa,shington as
the result of fumigations from the Trail Smelter, since the coming int.0 operation
of the remedial works. On the other hand, the evidence
discloses that there have
beenoccasional andunimportantmarkings
of veget'ationinarestricted
zone
in the upper part of the valley.
Atthepresentstageintheproceedings,it
is hardlypract,icabletorelate
the sit'uation directly to the issues as set forth in the questions.
It is obviously
impossible toparticularizetheevidenceuntiltheCanadianGovernmenthas
ascertained whether any spccific complaints will be made in re'spect t.o d'amage.
PART III-SURVEY
OF EVIDENCE DURING 1932 AND
SUBSEQUENT YEARS
10. IConditions prior to 1932 are not directly relevant to the present inquiry.
so farastheyfurnishthe
hist.orica1 background
'Theyarconlysignificantin
against which conditions in subsequent years are to
b'e examined, or in so far as
they may form the foundation of later research.
The ,Joint Report of Dean E. A. Howes of the University of Albcrta, Canada,
and Dean E. G. Miller of the University of Idaho, U.S.A., which will be referred
A I ) , wasmadeby
these twoindetoastheHowes-MillerReport(Appendix
-pendent scientists at the request of t5he International Joint Commission and
is
incJudetl in this statement', in order to furnish the historical background'for the
present inquiry.
11. The Report made by the President
of theNationalRcsearchCouncil
t'o the Departmcnt o,f External Affairs in 1930 is set forth in Appendix A2. This
Rcport sets forth the
conclusions of thefirstphases of the rcscarch conduded
under the direction of thc National Research Council
of Canada. It forms the
foundationuponwhichthcsubscqucntrescarchconductedunderthe
direct'ion
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
11
,o'f the Council was based.
It. is not submitted for the purpose
of bringing into
issue conditionsexistingpriorto
1932, but. inordertoclarifythesubsequent
portions of the record. The results of the research are embodied in Appendices
B1, B2, C1, C2, C3, C4, D l , D2, D3, D4 and D5. Each of these three series of
documents exhibits the results of more or less continuo'us researches commencing
in 1929 and the inclusion of the report on the earlier phase of the investigations
make it possible to understand the later documents and to appreciate the unity
and interrelat'ionof the investigrA t'ions.
12. T'he greater part of the evidence submitted consists of reports of research
undertaken and carried out under the direction of the National Research Council
of Canada. This is supplemented by reports of other scientists who have made
independentinvestigations.The
whole of thereportsare
beingplacedbefore
t.hc Tribunal, whether or not there is precise correspo.ndence in every detail.
In
an invcstigat,ion of this character, where a large number of scientists make studies
dealing wit.h differentaspects of thesamegeneralproblem,andevendealing
of view, it is inevitable that the
withthesameaspectsfromvaryingpoints
the otther hand, assuming that
results will not fit in wit'h absolute precision. On
it isreaso'nable t o
theinvestigationsarehonestlyandcompetentlyconducted
expect that the reports will presentasubstantiallyaccuratecompositepicture
of conditions.
13. Basic Reports.-Thefirstseries
of reportsconsists of basicstudies.
These do not relate directly to the question
of injury t'o forest, field or orchard.
They furnish the basic data necessary to the study
of such injury. The reports
include the determination of concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere,
astudy of thespread of thesmokestreamthroughtheinvestigation
of the
sulphur content of foliage, and a report on the construction
of remedial works
by the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company,
of Canada, Limited.
14. Atmospheric Conditions.-The
study of atmosphericcondit,ionswas
rommeneedunderthedirection
of Professor Urc of theUniversity of British
Columbia, Dr. G. S. Whitby,theDirector
of theDivision of Chemistry of
the National Research Council; and Dr. Morris Katz, of the Division of Chemistry of the National Research Council, in 1929. I t has been continued throughout the succeeding years under the general direction
of Dr. G. S. Whitby and
undertheimmediatesupervision
of Dr. MorrisKatz.Dr.Katz,inaddition
to the immediate supervision of the chemical investigations, has been in general
charge of research in the field.
Theresults
of thestudy
of atmospheric
conditions
are
set
forth
in
Appendix B 1.
Theinvestigation ofthse
sulphur dioxide content of theatmospherewas
1929, withtheinstallation
of twoautomaticsulphur
beguninNovember,
dioxide
recorders.
One
recorder
was placed
on
the ISmith farmsouth
of
Marble,about t,enmilesbelow
Northport,andtheotheratapointupthe
Deep Cneek valley north of Northport, about fivemiles east of theColumbia
new
river.Therecorder
atDeepCreekwas
moved in *June, 1930, toa
half milessouth of theinterlocation on theStrohranch,aboutfiveanda
TRAIL 8 M E L T E ~ ~ " S T A T E M E N TOF FACTS
12
nationalboundary,
in themainvalley
of theColumbiariver.TheMarble
recorderwasoperatedcont,inuouslyuntiltheend
of June, 1934, when i t was
removed to a point on the west bank of the Columbia river, opposite Northport.
a period of about four and half months, July
A recorder was also operated for
to November, 1930, nearMarcus.Thereport(Appendix
B l ) , analyzesand
classifises thesulphurdioxideconcentrationsasmeasuredbytheStrohand
Marble recorders.
Therecorderreadingsare
classified andtabulatedfromdifferentpoints
of view,inorder
thatthe basicinformationmaybeavailableinconvenient
form.
Dr. Katz in this report first refers to the yearly distribution of the recorder
I and 11. The reductionin
the emission of
readings as shownintables
sulphur dioxide a t t h e smelter, brought about by the construction and operation
of hhe remcdialworks,is
reflected inasubstantialreductioninthetotal
of concentrations.Thetrends
duration of fumigationsandinthemagnitude
are shownclearlyinfigure
1. TheMarblerecordershowsanevenmore
markedreductioninthetotalduration
ofg:ls
and magnit.ude of the e'oncentrations,and reflects boththe effect of theoperation of theremedialworks
and also the dilution of the gas in t,ravelling a distance of about fifteenmiles,
separatingtheStrohandMarblcrecorders.
Theanalyses of theseasonaldistribution
of gasreadings,assetforth
in
less gas is presentduringsixmonths
tables I11 and IV, indicatethatmuch
period,April to September,thanduringthewinter.Thisperiodcorresponds
I h . Katzdrawsattentiontotheverymarked
closely tothe growingseason.
0.25 p.p.m." occurringduring
the
reductioninconcentrations
of gasabove
growingseason.
A t 'Stroh farmin 1930, duringtheperiodJunc
10 tothe
end of September,gasconcen,trationsabove
0.25 p.p.m. were presentfor
210.6 hours.
During
April
to
'September,
1931, these
concentrations
were
recordedfor
139.8 hours;whereas,inthesimilarperiodsduring
1932, 1933,
1934 and 1935, the readings totalled 8.5, 17-9, 32.5 and 35.8. Concentrations,
above 0 . 5 p.p.m., duringthegrowingseason,have
been largelyeliminated.
Thereadings of theMarble recordershowareduction
of about 50 per
of gas present during tbe growing seasons,
as compared
cent in the total hours
withtheStrollreadings.Further,practicallyallconcentrations
of gas were
below 0.26 p.p.m., theonlyexception
beingone twenty-minut,erendingabove
0.25 in the spring of 1934.
The readings for each month of the year are set forth in tables V to XVI for
the 'Stroll recorder,andtables
XVII to XXVI fortheMarblerecorder.The
totalnumber of hourspresentpermonthfortheStrohrecorderareshown
2. Thischart shows that gas is presentintheNorthport
graphicallyinFig.
areaformuchlongerperiods
of timeduringthelatefallandwintermonths
than in th'e growingseason. Dr. Katz draws attention to the number
of hours
inwhich gasreadingsabove 0.25 p.p.m. wererecorded sin the growingseasons
of 1934 and 1935. H e pointsou't tihatwhile thetotalduration
of gasduring
1935 was higher than that of 1934, the duration of concentrationsabove 0.25
'The
by volume.
abbreviation "p.p.m."
means palrte of slulphur dioxide per million parte of air
SMEL,l%R-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
13
p.p.m.wassimilarandmost
of the increase indurationwasrepresentedby
relatively innocuous readings below 0 -10.
H e also refers to maximum concentrations and
t,o therecordswhichshow
a heavydecline of the highestmonthlyaverage
of allreadingsabovetrace
1932 t o 1935. The comparisonwiththecorresponding
valuesintheyears
figures fromtheMarblerecorder
show readings lower bothinconcentration
and duration than the Stroh readings. It may be interpolated that the reasons
1934 toNorthport weretwofold. I n t h e
forremovingtheMarblerecorderin
firstplace, sufficient evidence had already been obtained to prove that for all
practicalpurposestherewasacompletedispersion
of thegasstreaminthe
vicinity of Northport.Inthe
secondplace,
the evidenceoveraperiod
of
years of t,he completeabsence
of anysignificantconcentrations
of sulphur
dioxide a t Marblehadnegativedthepossibility
of economic damagebeing
caused in that vicinity.
In tables XXVI to XXXVtI Dr. Katz analyzed the most important fumigations which had occurred in the vicinity
of the Stroh ranch and the Marble recorder
duringthegrowingseasons.Th'etablesshow
that during the growingseasons
of 1932 and 1933 thefumigat'ionsweretoo
brief indurationandtoo
low, in
boththeaverageandmaximumc.oncentrations,
t o causeinjuryeventothe
mostsensitivecropplants.During
1934 and 1935, th,efumigationswere,
on
the N*hole, higher thanthose of thetwopreviousseasons.
I n a few instances
thefumigationsin#thevicin'ity
of theStrohranch
were of sufficient duration
andintensitytosuggestthe
possibility of sulphur dioxide markingsbeing
producedonsensitiveplants.Ontheotherhand,theevidence
of observers
in the field and the result of the experimental work a t Summerland, bchh indicatethat,althoughfumigations
of thetypepresentin
th.e Northportarea
during the growing seasons of 1934 and 1935 might cause #occasional markings
to the most sensitive vegetation, they could
not, cause sufficient injury to result
in economic damage.
15. Sulphur Content of Vegetation.-The
study of the spread of sulphur
dioxide in the Columbia valley, thr,ough the examination
of the sulphur content
1929. Thereport of the 1929 investigations
of vegetation,wascommencedin
willbe found in Appendix A 2 , a t p. 15. The report of the subsequent studies
is set forth in Appendix R 2.
This study by Dr. Katz included theanalysisandclassification
of collections of vegetation made in the years 1930, 1931 and 1934. The normal variation
insulphurcontent
of thistype of vegetationwasestablishedbyanalyses
of
controlcollectionsfromlocationsremotefromthesmokezone.
The limits of the distribution of sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere in
1930
and 1931 were determined in order to
show the spread and dilution
of the gas
in the conditions existing before the completion of the remedial works. A
comparative basiswasthusfurnishedforthestudy
ofconditionsasshown
by the
1934 foliagecollections.
A special study was undertaken with a view to determining the diminution
of the smoke effect with increasing altitude. Samples
of vegetation were taken
a t varying altitudes on the slopes of two mountains between Northport and the
14
TRAIL SMELTER-STATEMENT
OF PACTS
boundary. Analysis oftjhe samples disclosed t>hat the annual increase in sulphur
content with age was simi1,ar a t points of greater altitude than 3,750 feet to that
foundincollectionsfromoutsidethesmoke
zone. At lower pointstherewas
evidence of sulphur dioxide effect. A reference to the map will disclose t h a t t h e
limit of sulphur dioxideeffect thusestablished is about 2,300 feetabovethe
river a t t h a t point.
The study of the relative rates of absorption of gas by vegetation, during
the summer and winter, proved, beyond all possibility
of doubt, that during bhe
winter period, the end of November until March, the needles of conifers do not
absorb sulphur. The
evidenceeliminatesthepossibility
of damagetotreesin
the Northport area by fumigations occurring during the winter period.
With regard to the limitsof distribu.tion of sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere,
there is evidence in the sulphur content
of vegetation t h a t in 1930 to 1931 the
furthest limit of penetration of sulphur dioxide gasinthemainvalley
of the
Columbia river was in the region of Marcus and Kettlc Falls. With regard to
the tributary valleys of this 'area, the limits
of penetration of sulphur dioxide
were as follows: In the Cedar Creek valley a substan.tially normal sulphur contentinvegetationwasreached
a t a pointabout sixmilesfrom
the Columbia
river. In the Deep Creek valley there was practically no evidence 'of gas occurrence at about seven miles from trhe mouth. On the west side of the Columbia
there was eviden,ce of t.he presence of gas up the Sheep Creek valley as far as
Velvet.
I n 1934 the furthest limit of absorption in the main valley of the Columbia
river was in the region between Marble and Bossburg. Most
of the collectimons
show only a very slight increase in sulphur content
a t Marble, .but the fir shows
a slight effec.t in the vicinity of Bossburg. With regard to tihe tributary valleys,
there is evidence in the Cedar 'Creek valley of the presence of sulphur dioxide
as far as Cedar ,Creek bridge about three milts east
'of the Columbia river. I n
the Deep Creek valley there
is noappreciable effecton vegetation a t apoint
two and one-half miles from the mouth of the creek, and in the case of the Sheep
Creek valley tihere is definite evidence of sulphur accumulation in the foliage as
far as three milesfrom the mouth of thecreek. I n the vicinity of Velvet, t h e
accumulation is negligible. In the 'Onion Creek area, about two milesfrom the
mouth of the creek there is n o noticeable effect on pine, larch, hazel, and zspen.
'Only the old growth of fir showssomeaccumulation of sulphur at this point.
Therehas beena markedreduction in theextent of penetration of sulphur
dioxide during the year 1934, compared with previous years.
Apart from the evidence as to the spread of the gas, the results of the 1934collections, ingeneral, sh'owa marked'decreaseinsulphurcontentcompared
a t correspondingpoints.
withthe 19130-31 collections of similarspeciestaken
Thestudies of sulphurcontent
of vegetationestablish
thatin asmall
district in the upper part of the m'ain valley of the Columbia river, witihin five.
miles of the international boundary, the foliage samples in
1934 showedasulphur content indicating that the vegetation was reaching a condition in which
there was a possibility of slight injury or retardation. There is no evidence
of
concentrationsbeingre'ached
a ta n y pointwhichwouldresultineconomic
damage.
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
15
16. Remedial Measures.-Therecord
of construction of remedialworks
at Trail by tlhe IConsolidated MiningandSmeltingCompany,
is containedin
the Report of Mr. S. G. Blaylock, Vice-president and General Manager
of the
Company, Appendix B 3.
Reference has already been made to this matter in reference to the proceedingsbefore theInternationalJoint
,Commission (Supra pp. 6, 7 ) . The Company itself outlined a project designed to reduce the output
of sulphur dioxide
at the smelterbyapproximately 35 percent.Thisprojectwasreportedupon
It
bytheUnitedStates\Government'sexpertandgivenunqualifiedapproval.
was approved in turn by the In,ternational Joint 'Commission and it was recommended that the Company carry tihe project to completion.
Mr. Blaylock's Report, Appendix B 2, shows that the C'ompany throughout
its history has followed the policy of installin,g the most modern processes and
improvementsinitsplants.
As aresult ,of thispolicythe
emission of solids
from the stacks had been substantially eliminated and the proportion of sulphur
dioxide to metal output had been greatly reduced.
Notwithstanding
this
relative
improvement,
the
great
increase
in
the
quantity of metalsproduced led to substantial inscreasein the total output of
sulphur di,oxide. This reached the point, in the year
1926, a t which complaints
of damageweremadeforthefirsttime.Theyears
1926 t o 1930, in which
9,000 t o 10,000 tons per month, have been
sulphur dioxide output ranged from
regadedasindicatingarange
of sul'phur omimssion involvingrisk of damage
tointerestsinWashington.
The years 1916 to 1925, in which ,sulphur dioxide output ranged from
3,700
to 6,400 canlikewise b'e regarded as establishingthesafetyrange.Theyare
the years in which nocomplaints' of damage were made and only one
suggestion of possible effect was made to the 'Company.
Accordingly, thesulphur dioxide output of 1925, orapproximately 6,500
tons per month, has
b'een taken as the saf'e range of sulphuremission.
This undertakin,g was made by Mr. Blaylock before the International Joint
Commission andwasimplementedbytheimmediateconstruction
of remedial
of $10,000,000. These
works,
including
works
involving
the
expenditure
sulphuricacidandfertilizerplantswentintofulloperationearlyin
1932.
During 1932 and succeedingyears,therange
of sulphur emission has been
from 3,400 tonspermonthtoa
maximlum of 6,500 tonspermonthin
1935.
Inthismannertheundertakingmadeby
Mr. Blaylock ha,sbeencompletely
implsemented andsulphurdioxideoutputhas
beenkepfdown
tothelimit
of
10,000 tonspermonth,
less 35 percent,whichwasundertakenbeforeand
approved by the International ,Joint
Commlission.
Throughoutthisperiodthecompanyhasbeeninvestigatingadditional
methods of recoveringsulphurfromthe
gases, particularlyfromthedilute
sulphurdioxide of theleadplantstacks.
A processwasdeveloped
forthe
concentration of 'sulphur dioxide and subsequent conversion t o elemental sulphur,
togetherwithammoniumsulphateasaby-product.Thefirstpilot&menta1
sulphur p1an.t began operations ,early in 1934 and produced 231 tons of sulphur
inthatyearand
312 tons of sulphurin 1935. Alargeplantis
now under
construction,involvinganexpenditure
of tw,o and a halfmillions of dollars,
16
SMELTER"STATEfi1ENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
which will begin toproduceelementalsulphurin
1936. Bythe endof that
ye'ar,productionshouldreach
therate
of aboutsixtytonsperday.The
Company'sachievementinsulphurrecovery
will thusbecarried
f a r beyond
1,800
theobjectivepromisedtotheInternationalJointCommission.Between
and 1,900 additional tons per month of sulphur that would otherwise be emitted
totheatmosph,ere,
will berecovered,therebyreducingthetotalamount
of
will bringbackthesulphur
sulphur emlitted to 4,800 tonspermonth.This
(jutput approximately to the quantity emitted in 1924, notwithstanding that this
est,imateisbaseduponmetalproductioncalculatedas
atan all-time high
peak.Theoutput
of sulphur will thus be reduced toanamountequalto
approximately 51 percent ofIthe
totaloutputduringthe
five years, 1926 to
1930 inclusive.
17. ForeAtInvestigations.-The
effect of sulphurdioxideintheairupon
forest conditions in the Columbia valley has
been the subject of inves,tigations
commencing in the year 1929 and extending up to the present time. The record
of the results of the inquiry made in
1929 are set forth in Appendix
A 2, pp.
16 to 23.
Thepathologicalinvestigationsandthetreeboringswereundertakenby
Mr. A. W. McCallum,B.Sc.F.,M.A.,whohasforsomesixteenyears
been
forestpathologist of t.he CanadianDepartment of Agriculture. The entomological investigations were undertaken by Mr. Ralph Hopping, who for thirteen
yearsservedwiththeUnitedStatesforestsurveyinCaliforniaandhasfor
the last sixteen years been the forest entomologist with the Canadian Department of Agriculture. The measurement of treeboringsforannualgrowthwas
undertaken by the Dominion Forest Service, and analysis and interpretation
of
themeasurementsweremadebyMr.
F. E. Lathe, MdSc., Director of thc
Division of Research Information, National Research Council, with the assistance of the st,aff of the Council.
Theexperimentalworkconducted,involvinginvestigations
of the effect
of sulphur dioxide upon forest trees, was undertaken by
Dr. Morris Katz and
Mr. McCallum.
The results of thc study of forest conditions arc set forth in four reports.
18. Report on Forest Conditions, 1934.-Thisreportby
Mr. A. W.
McCallum,issetforthinAppendixC
1. It relates t o anexamination
of
conditions in the field in the Northport area, made with a
view to determining
whether injury was being caused to forest trees in the Northport area by sulphur
dioxide, and if so, the extent of such injury.
The first branch of the investigation consisted of observations for sulphur
dioxide and otheT injuriesupon'treesandshrubs.
On the 4th May there had
been a fumigation which had marked larch over a considerable area, but which
had not marked either Yellowpine or Douglas fir. There ha,d been a previous
fumigationin 1930 withinjurytolarchanditwas
poss,ible to comparethe
two fumigations in respect to extent and intensity.
The injury in 1934 was not
comparable either in extent
or intensity t o the earlier one which had occurred
of theareain
whichlarch
in 1930. On MapNo. 4 theapproximatelimits
wasinjured,bothin
1934 and 1930, are indicated, and it is apparent that the
TRAIL S M E L 1 ~ E R " S T R T E M E N T OF FACTS
17
1934 area wasmuchsmallmcrthanthat
of 1930. In 1930 the area extended
down the river valley t'hirtccn nriles farther tllcnin1934, and there were very
considerableextensionsinto
tllc tributaryvallcys of Dccp creek, Sheep creek
andCedarcreck.In
1934 there wa's practically no injuryin Deep creek or
Sheep creek, and nonc a t all in Cctlar crcck. Furt'ller, tllc injury did not extend
as far up tllc mountain slopcs as in 1930.
T l ~ c r cn ' : ~an even murc strikingdifrcrcnw in the degree of injury.The
counts of trees a t tllc mouth of I>ccl) creek and at the Stroll ranch showed that
tllcrc were approxim:itcly52 arid 63per centrc,spcctivcly of larcllcsinjured
by gas, in 1930. I n 1934, a t the s:mc placc, tllcrc were only 3 and 2 per cent
rcspcctivcly of tllclarcllcs 111arkc(l. 111 1930 nlany of the larches were killed;
while in1934 Mr. A!tcCallunl wxs unableto f i l l t l :I single tree which had been
killed. H c pointsout that thc injury clonc to larcllin1934might
be regardcd
as slight in character.
The larch fumigation is I)nrLiculurly significant in that it indicates an area
cxt,cndingfromthevicinity
of Northporttotllcboundaryandincludingthe
butnotthetributary
crcelq within
lowerbenches of tllcColurnbinvalley,
which therewasevidence of slightmarkingsaffectinglarch,butnotDouglas
fir or Yellow pine.
The observationswith rcgard to forcst conditionsgcncrally,negative
the
occurrence of economic damageto otllcr forcsttrccswithinthelimitedarea
to whichrefcrcncc has been made. Tllcexamination of the condition of wild
shrubs, including those which are mosteasilymarked
by sulphur dioxidte, was
helpfulindelimiting
the area withinwhichmarkingsmayoccur,theresult
bcing in general accord with t.llos'c cshblished by the larch iumigation.
The second phase of thc invcstigation relatcd to the establishment
of reprowcre cstablishctlwithinthe
area in which the
ductionplots.Nineteenplots
t o 1'932. Thetotalnumber of seedlings
greatestinjuryhad beencausedprior
from 1 to10years old growing on theninctcenplots, was 441. This evidence
negativesthesuggestion that reproduction of yolmg trees is bcing or has been
prcvcnted by sulphur dioxide.
The third phase of the investigation rclatcd to tllccollection of treeseeds
and the determination of their viability. Tllc
tests for Yellowpine established
thatthesulphur
dioxideconditionslladno
effect upontheviability
,of such
l l inconclusive, for rcasonswhich
seds. The tests forDouglas fir and I ~ ~ r c wercb
arc discussed at' page fifteen of the report, but wllich have no relation to sulphur
dioxide.
T l ~ cfourthphase of theinvestigationconsisted
o f there-cxamination of
sampleplotswhichhad
h e n cstablisllcdin1930.
The condition of the plots
reflectcd the improvcd appearance of the trees, the only instance in
which any
killing of trees llad been caused sincc 1930 bcing in the case of the Douglas fir
plot nearest t o the border.
Annex 1 sets forth the study
matle in 1930 of 37reproductionplots which
contained a total of 5,99'1 scctllingsfromonc to five years old. The conclusions
of tllc study indicated that scctllings occurrctl :lhmtlantly wllercverin the area
natural conditions were favourable for reproduction.Theplotsextended
over
13847-2
18
T R A I L XMELTEIC"S2'ATEAI~:NT OF FACTS
tllc various zones in whicll it had beenalleged that severe, medium, or light
injury was being caused. No differencesin rcgard to tpantity or condition of
seedlings was observed in tllcsczones.
Thcrct was only one instancein which
injury by sulpllurdi~oxide was concerned, and that was in one plot located just
a t tllc border ant1 it was not considered likely that such injury would occur more
tllan tllrccmilesfrom
the borclcr in the river Tjallcy. I n most ,of the plots the
seedlings ~ v e r cin cxccllcnt contlition and were making rapid growth.
Tllis Annex is not givcn to cstablisll the facts of reproduction as they werc
in 1938~
and 1)rccctiing years. It is submitted sirn1)ly for the purpose of establislling that even a t a time in whirl1 it was allcgctl that substantial injury was
being caused intllc Northport area, i.c. priorto 1932, reproduction was not
prc5judiai:dly affected, exceptpossiblywitllin
the arca immediatelyadjacent
to the boundary.
Annex 2 relatestothe
cst,:lhlishmcnt of eamplcplotsin1930.
Thisstudy
nns untlcrtakcn at tlmt time with a view to stutlying thc intcnsity of the injury
then c:luscd by sulpllur dioxitlc. I t is submittell in the prcscnt proceedings solely
as givingthefoundationfor
tl1c comparison bcltwccn thc condition of these
samplcplots intllcperiod
prrceding the curtnilmcnt of sulphur dioxide with
theirprcscntcondition.Thegeneralimprovement
in thc plots is submittedas
evidcnce of tllc climination of economic damage to tllc forcst in thc Northport
arca.
1'9. Report on Forest Conditions, 1935.-Tllis
Rcportby Mr. A. W.
RIcC8allum is set fort11 inAppcntlix C 2. It rchtcs to an examination of conditions in t'llc field to determine wllctllcr injury was being caused and, if so, the
cxtcnt of tllc injury.
Tllc first branch of the invcstig:btion ronsistcd of observations with a view
to dctcrmining and defining tllc arc% in tllc Columbia vallcy in which injury had
occurred. In this year markings
could only be foundin a rcstrictcd arca near
t l x boundnry and a t an isolatod point in the ncighbourllood of the Stroh ranch.
I t was possible, tllcrcforc, by latcbral surveys to tlcfinc almost with prccision the
p a r t of tllc district within wllicll markings could bc found on forcst trces and
shrubs.
Tllcrc was a dcfinitelocalized arca of injuryncarthcStrollranch,about
250 yards by 10'0 yards in cxtont. At thispointinjury was not sevcrc, but it
was uurnistakahlc, and it affectcd birch, maplo and certain unimportant shrubs.
Tllc surrounding country showed no markings.
Tllcother area covered the Columbiavalley to about 33 miles below thc
imrdcr includingthe lowcr portions of thevalleyand
a considerablelateral
extension on the nortllwcst bank of thc river. Even
there it didnotcxtend t o
tllchighestground.
This zone within wllich markings could bc found in 1935
is indicated on M a p No. 7 andthc
variolw surveysby
which limits were
defined arc set fort'h a t pp. 8-180.
The second branch of the investigation consisted of the study of quantitative data with rcgard t'o sulpllllr dioxide injury to the broad-leaved trees within
tllcrestrictcd arca within whitdl markings cou!il bcfonntl. Theresults are sct
fort11 at 1'13. 11 and 12 nntl it. nl'lwars tllnt, it was only in n small arcn bclow thc
border that any injury t o shrubs and broad-leaved trees was done during 1935.
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
O F FACTS
19
The third aspect of the investigation consiskd of an examination of sulphur
effect a t Silver Bell gulch, in order
t o determine whether there was any
possiat Trail comingthroughthegulchoverthe
bility of fumesfromthesmelter
divideanddownLittle
)Sheepcreek. Mr.McCallum's conclusionwas that the
probability of thegasreachingtheUnitedStatesside
of the border inLittle,
SheepCreekvalleybyway
of SilverBell gulch in sufficient concentration t o
cause injury, is most remote.
Thefourthpart
of theinvestigationwhichrequiresconsideration
is the
study of sulphur ,dioxide injury to coniferous trees. Mr. McCallum was unable
to find any symptoms of injury to Yellowpine and Douglas fir at any point
in the Columbia valley.
H e points out t,hat if, possibly, there was some slight
chronicinjurytothesetreeswithinashortdistance
of theborder,itwas
so
inconsequentialincharacteras
t o escapenotice.
H e alsopointsout
that the
amount of timber close t o t'he river and near the border
is negligible, H e adds
thatshrubsandbroad-leavedtreesaremuchmoresusceptibletoinjurythan
coniferoustrees, a viewwhichisconfirmed
bytheresults
of thefumigation
experiments carried on a t Summerland.
The fifth part of the Report, whichrequiresspecialconsideration,relates
to effects of fumigation during the winters of 1933-34 and 1934-35 (pp. 16-18).
Mr. RiIcCallum analysesthegasrecordsduringt~hesewinterseasonsand
(also
theresults of theexperimentalfumigationsconducted
a t Summerlandin 1931
and 19315. Thegasrecordsconsideredinconjunctionwiththeresult
of the
Summerlandexperiments would notjustify a conclusion thatthefumigations
during the two winters in question
could possibly have caused injury to Yellow
pine or Douglas fir. This conclusion was confirmed by the fact
that neither in
the spring of 1934 or of 1965 was thcre any sign of damage, which might have
occurred during the preceding winter season, to
be observed in the field. There
was thefurthercorroborationdrawnfromthestudies
of sulphurcontent of
and Douglas fir, colfoliage(Appendix B 2 ) . The foliage of bothYellowpine
lectedduringseveralyearsinthefalland
in thewinterfromthesametrees,
showed no increase in sulphur content. Without increase in sulphur in
the leaves
there could be no injury to trees, due to sulphur
di.oxide. It seems t o beclear
thewinter
that the po'ssibility of injury l,o conifersfromfumigationsduring
season is out of the question and, of course, a fortiori the possibility of injury
t o field crops or deciduous trees is even more remote.
20. R e p o r t on Forest Growth Studies.-These studies were undertaken to
supplement the wo'rk which was done in
1929, a summary of which appears in
Appendix A2, pp. 16-23. By combining theresults it ispossible todepictthe
life history of the trees in the Columbia valley over
a period of twenty years.
A comparison of thesituation, reflected bythesestudiesduringtheyears
in
question 1932-1934, makes it possible todrawconclusionswithregard
t o the
as a result of the remedial works
recovery of the trees in the ,Columbia valley
constructed by the Company.
Approximately 9,000 treeswereexamined,boringsmadeandthegrowth
foreachyearmeasured,
classified andanalyzed. In all 153,000 measurements
of treesexaminedmade it possible t o eliminate
were made. The large number
138474
20
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
individualvariationandtorevealthe
effect of generalinfluencesprevailing
in the area.
Thestudies of theret,ardation of Yellowpines bysmeltersmokeareset
forthinTable
4, a t page 10. Yellow pine is thecharacteristictree
of t.he
Columbiavalley.Whileitis
less sensiitve to sulphur dioxide thanDouglas
fir, i t domes show, in a striking manner, the effect of the presence of appreciable
or fromtheTrail
quantities of sulphurdioxide,whetherfromtheNorthport
smelter.
In the 1929 studies, Yellow pine had shown the effect of fumigations from
the Trail Smelter, ranging from a large retardation
of growth in groups of trees
withintwelvemiles of the bo,undary,amedium
Trail effect withinfourmiles
of Northport,,smallretardation atMarbleandBossburg,andacompletedisappearance of any evidence of Trail effect betweenBossburgandEvans.The
great reduction in the intensity and duration
of sulphur dioxide concent.rations
in the atmosphere, resulting from the construction
of the remedial works',complet.ely eliminated any retardation of Yellow pines at any point in the Columbia
valley.Everygroup
of Yellowpines
inthevalley,fromtheboundaryto
as comparedwith
Marcus, s'howed animprovementingrowthinrecentyears
t,he standard or control groups situated outside the area.
Thestudies of theretardation
of Douglas firs bySmeltersmokewere
dividcdintotwoparts.Thefirstrelatedtoaseries
of studiesundertakenin
1930, with a view to determining the lateral extent
of retardation; the second
wasconcernedwith
theexamination of treesandborings,takenin1934,to
disco,ver whether the trees had yet. responded to the lessened quant,it,y of sulphur
dioxidein the atmosphere.
Douglas firs are moresensitivetosulphur
dioxide than Yellowpines and
have beenslow t o recoverfrom thefumigations of 1927 t o 1930. The results
indicate that there is an area bebeen Northport and the boundary withinwhich
the recoveryin
rate of growthfromtheinjury
of
19217
to 1930 is notyet
complete.
21. Report on ExperimentsConducted at Summerland 1931, on the
Effect of Sulphur Dioxide on Yellow Pine and Douglas Fir.-This
report on
experimentsconductedby
Dr.MorrisKateand
Mr. -4.W. McCallumisset
forth in Appendix C 4.
This report describes the nlet'hod
followed in a relatively large number
of
controlled experiments with known quantities 0.f sulphur dioxide fo'r given periods
of time on Yellow pine and Douglas fir trees, with the object of determining
( a ) the duration and
conccmtration of gasnecessarytoproduceinjuryto
conifers;
( b ) the perio'd of the year when the susceptibility of trees to sulphur dioxide
injury is greatest and also the period when the trees are lea& sensitive
t.0 such injury;
(c) the effect of prolongedfumigationswithconcentrationsbetween
0.50
and 1.OO p.p.m. of sulphur dioxide;
( d ) whether it is possible t o treat trees with low concentrations of gas for
prolongcdperiodswithoutproducinginjury
and, if so, underwhat
conditionssuchnon-toxicconcentrations
may occur.
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
21
Theexperimentswereconducted
a tt h e DominionExperimentalStation
at Summerland, British Columbia, upon carefully selected plots
of trees growinginnat'uralhabitat,theplotsusedforthetestsbeingco,mpletelycovered
withanairtightcabinetcapable
of freelyadmittinglightand
of a size to
permit the fumigation of an average of ten trees, ranging from seedlings to trees
8 to 10 feethigh, and 15 to 30 years old.
The apparatus designed to insureaccuracy of conditionsisfullydescribed
and illustrated.
Forty-threeplots,containinginallabout
450 trees,weretreatedwith
of time.The
differentconcent'rations of sulphurdioxideforvaryingperiods
work was commencedon January 27, 1931, and continued until about the end
of September.
This experimental investigation lasting eight months
showed that, in addition to the influence on susceptibility of various factors such as temperature, light
andhumidity,anotherveryimportant,factor
is theseasonalvariationinthe
response of the t'rees togastreatment.Duringthewintermonths,extending
to March 1, when plant activity is low, the trees are very resistant to s'ulphur
dioxide and high concentrations of gasappliedcontinuouslyoverlongperiods
oft,ime are required to produce injury. These injurious concentrations are far
higher than the highesk concentrationseverrecordedintheNorthpo'rtarea.
Whengrowth commences and proceedsvigorouslyfrom
earlyinAprilto
aboutthemiddle
of July,thesusceptibility
of thetreesis
atitsmaximum.
During the later period of this growth, the resistance of the trees is increasing.
Whengrowthhassubstantiallyceasedandthetreesareapproachingthe
dormant condition of fall and winter, the trees are extremely resistant to sulphur
dioxidme.
Theseexperimentsshowed
that while thetrees couldbefumigated
for 3
days continuously with 0.75 p p m . of sulphur dioxide during the active growing
seasonin late April and May without being injured, and a 6 day and 3 hour
fumigationwiththesameconcentrationresultedinsevereinjuryduringthis
active growing season, yet the same fumigation, but for twice as long, in August,
produced not a trace of injury.
Theresultsobtainedfromplotsfumigatedwith
1.00 p.p.m.demonstrate
that, during the winter period, trees can
be subjected to this concentration for
five dayswithoutinjury,and,evenafter
7 daysfumigation,markingtothe
The test, on Plot No. 5
extent of only 5 per cent' of the foliage was produced.
showed that under winter conditions 4 days continuous fumigation a t 5-00 p.p.m.
provedinnocuous;whereas
42 hours of asimilarfumigationindaylightonly
duringactivegrowthin
Marc11 destroyed 80 per cent of the foliage of Plot
No. 14.
Knowing the concentrations of gas in t'he Northport field, and apprcciating
that, they are higher in the winter than the growing seas,on, these experiments
show t,hat it is unlikely that any in,iurgcan take place in the fall and winter
seasons because of the high resistance of trees a t suchperiods.
13847-31
22
TRAIL SMELTER-STATEMENT
OF FACTS
I n addition to this, seas'onal data the study showed that the following treatments of theseconifers a t Summerland, even during the most susceptible time
of the year, were without injurious effect:0.25 p.p.m. for 450 hours.
0.50 p.p.m.for117hours.
0.75 p.p.m. for 72 hours.
At the time of the year when trees are most resistant the following fumigationsproduced no injury:0.50 p.p.m. for 1,008 hours.
0.75 p.p.m. for 336 hours.
1 - 0 0 p.p.m. for 216 hours.
5.00 p.p.m. for96
hours.
Concentratio'ns, comparable t o these in respect to magnitude and duration.
had not been found in the Northport area prior to 1931 and, a fortiori, they have
notbeenrecorded
ssince the beginning of 1932.
Annex 1 t,o thisreportis a record of anexamination of thecondition of
the same plots, made three years later, in
1934. It wasfound that out of the
41plots treatedin 1931, only11 showedsome residual effect, and10 of the
11 had reccived very severe furnigat'ions of from 2.00 to 5.00 p.p.m., when the
foliage had been destroyed in the test by not less than 20 per cent, and in most
cases from 75 per cent to 100 per cent.
22. Investigations Relating to the Effect of Sulphur Dioxide on Agricultural Conditions.-The
effect of sulphur dioxide in the air upon agricultural
conditionsint'hcColumbiavalleyhas
been thesubject of investigations conductedbytheNationalResearchCouncilcommencingintheyear
1929 and
extending to the present time.
The reco,rd of theresults of theinquirymadein
1929 arc setforthin
Appendix A2, pp. 8-10 and 23-32. This part of the record is not directly releit is submittedasfurnishingthebackvant t o thepresentinvestigation,but
groundaudasafoundationfor
a comparativepoint of view. Thecontrast
between the conditions during the period in which
economic damage was being
caused in parts of theColumbiavalleyandthepresentconditioninwhich
damagchas been climinatcdas a result of theconstruction of remedialworks
bytheCompany
is necessaryinordertoobtain
a trueappreciation of the
prcscnt situation.
Thc originalinvestigationintoagriculturalconditionswascommencedby
Dr. Hadwen, who' investigated the claims of live stock poisoning, and Dr. Duff
of the University of Toronto, and Mr. Middleton, Horticulturist of the Department of Agriculture,whodealtwith
field cropsandorchards,respectively.
The investigations with regard to
field crops and orchards have beenconducted by Dr. Lcdingham, Plant Pathologist of the National Research Council,
who was associated with Dr. Duff in the earlier phases
of the inwstigation.
Theexperimentalwork,involvinginvestigations
of the effect of sulphur
dioxide upon field crops, was undertaken by Dr. Morris Katz and by Dr. Ledingham, both of thc National Research C,oun#cil.
TRAIL SMELT.ER-ST.4TEMENT
OF PACTS
23
The effect of sulphur dioxide upon field crops and orchard's in the Columbia
valleyhasalso
been thesubject of invcstigationsbyindependentscientists
andexperts.Thescscientistsandexpertshavcmadeinvcstigationsand
field
surveys a t t,he request of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company.
Dr. B. I,. Richards made a survey of field conditions in 1935. Dr. Richards
ishead of the Department of Botany and Plant Pathology
of the Utah State
Agricultural College andPathologist attheIJtahState
AgriculturalExperiment Station at. Logan, Utah. Since
1925, he had had several years of practical
experience in the Salt Lake valley, investigating complaintsof farmers of smelter
smoke damage on behalf of the smelters in that valley.
Dr. Raymond J. Pool made a survey
of field conditionsin 1935. Dr. Pool
isprofessor of Botany at the Univer'sity of Nebraska. He has
beenassociated
foreightyears
wit,h varioussmeltercompaniesindiagnosingsulphur
dioxide
effectupon
vegetationandinconductingsulphur
dioxide fumigation experimentsuponvegetation.ThecompaniesincludedtheAmericanSmeltingand
RefiningCo'mpany,InternationalNickelandthePhelps-DodgeCorporation,
and the work wasi carried on in Ut.ah, Arizona, Texas, Washington, New York
staff of the Swain Smelter smoke comand 'Ontario. Dr. Pool was also on the
mission.
Mr.FredMathews,anagriculturistonthepermanent
staff of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, has been engaged in the investigation
of the effect of sulphurdioxidefumigationsonveget;ation
intheColumbia
valley since 1927.
Theresults of thesestudies of field cropandorchardeonditiominthe
Columbiavalley,togetherwiththeresults
of researchconducted at SummerD series of appendices D l to D8, inclusive.
land, are set fo'rth in the
23. Report on Agricultural Conditions, 1934.-This
Report by Dr. Katz
and Dr. Ledingham is set forth in Appendix D l . It relates t,o the examination
of conditions in the field, in order to determine whether injury was being caused
and if so the extent of t h e injury.
This inves!tigationinvolved
anexamination
of alltheimportantfarms
undercultivat,ion at intervals during the summer. The area under observation
embracedthemainColumbiaRivervalleyfromtheinternationalboundary
toBossburgandthetributaryvalleys
of CedarCreek,DeepCreek,Sheep
Creek,OnionCreek,FlatCreek,RattlesnakeCreekandBrodieBasin.Visits
of KettleFalls,
werealso madetopoints in themainColumbiavalleysouth
t8he Colville valley, the Kettle River valley, the Kelly Hill district and Grand
Forksvalley.Theinvestigationcoveredobservations
for symptoms of sulphur
dioxide injury to crops, theabsorption or accumulation of sulphurdioxidein
alfalfa, the effect of sulphur dioxide occurrence on the pro'tein content of alfalfa,
and plant diseases.
Areport on sulphurdioxidemarkings
oncropsis
setforthonpp.
9 and
10. It indicates that there is an area confined to a limit'ed number of farms lying
well withinthemainvalley
of theColumbiariverbetweentheinternational
boundary and NorLhport, where occasional slight markings
were observed in the
crops.
24
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
The study of the protein and total sulphur content
of alfalfa grown in the
Nort.hport area, pp. 10-14, indicates that there is no diminution in the nutritive
values of cropsgrownin
theColumbiaValleybyreason
of t,hepresence of
sulphurdioxide.Onthecontrary,evidenceshows
thatthere issome correlation between high sulphur content and
high protein content of the control collections indicating that a high sulphur content may be beneficial
t80 the plant.
I t is established that the determining factors in connection with protein content in the smoke zone are not related to the presence of sulphur dioxide concentrations such as now prevail, but to the type and charact.er
of the soil and the
presenceorabsence
of adequatewatersupply.
The conclusions with regard to the
field crops survey are set fort,h on page
31. Theinvestigationestablishesthattherewas
no measurable crop damage
in 1934 onany of thefarmsintheareabetweent'heinternationalboundary
obs'erved onthe
andNorthport as aresult of the occasionalslightmarkings
crops. The observed marks wereconfined to a limited number o'f farms in this
region,lying well withinthemainvalley
of t'heColumbiariver.Thesefarms
may be considered as situated in a zone of hazard where under conditions favourabletoinjury,occasionallightmarkingsoncropsmay
be causledbysulphur
dioxide. A comparison 'of the crop yields in this area with t,hose of neighbouring
valleys,suchasMetaline,KettleandGrand
Forks, leadstothe
conclusion
thatthereare
no cssential differences. YieldsaroundNorthportarejustas
high as in any of these regions wherever soil and moisture conditions are similar.
According to Dr. Kats and Dr. Ledingham, the slight markings on crops,
observedonalimitednumber
of farmsbetweentheboundaryandNorthport,
do not constitute economic damage.
24. Report on AgriculturaI
Conditions,
1935,"Thisreportby
Dr.
Ledingham is set forth in Appendix
DL'. It relates to a survey of conditions in
the field made with a view to determining whether any injury was being caused
by fumigations from the Trail smelter and if so the ext,ent of such injury.
I n 1935, Dr. Ledingham was engaged with Dr. Kat,z in conducting an experimental fumigation program a t Summerland and did not, spend the entire summer
intheNorthportarea.InJune,July,AugustandSeptember,frequenttrips
were made to the district in order to make a
field crop survey. Approximately
the same number of farms were kept under observation as in 1934.
The association of the experimental with the field work proved t o be very
valuable, because i t provided an opportunity t o make direct comparison of markings produced on alfalfa under controlled conditions with those actually encountered in the area subject to sulphur dioxide fumes from the smelter.
T'heReportat
pp. 13, t o 18 containsanextensive'study
of thediseases
present on alfalfaintheNorthportarea,togetherwithadescription
of the
symptoms. This may be compared with the plant disease survey, Appendix
Dl,
pp. 14-17. A condition was disclosed in both years in which plant diseases were
prevalent in the Northport district, many of which caused sympt,oms similar to
thosewhichnormallyresultfromsulphurdioxidefumigations.
The confusion
betweensymptomsresultingfromplantdiseaseandma,rkingsfromsulphur
dioxidehaspersistentlyledtotheassertions
of c!aims by farmersincasesin
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
25
whichthereis
no sulphurinjury.
It must be pointedout,however,
that the
Northport area is no more subject to plant diseases than the surrounding districts
outside of the smoke zone.
Thesurvey of farmsandcrops
followed thesamegenerallinesasinthe
preceding year.
Dr. Ledingham was able to conclude,
as a result of examination of conditions in t,he field, that during the summer of 1935 there were only a few slight
markings caused by sulphur dioxide on crops in t,he Northport area. These were
confined t o avery few farms close totheinternationalboundary.Theextent
of these markings was even less than the small amount, present during the growing season of 1934. These findings correspond closely to those of Mr. McCallum
in his report on conditions in 1935 (C2). They
disclose t'he existence of an area
much more narrowly rest,ricted t'han that which was found in 1934 within which
slightinjurybymarkingswasfound,butwithinwhichtherewas
no evidence
of economic damage.
Notwit'hstandingthepresence
of sulphurdioxidetherewasnoes,sential
differencein the cropsgrownaroundNorthporttothosegrowninthe
neighbouringvalleys,suchastheKettleandGrandForks.Mostcrops
between
Northport and the international boundary
were jus't as good as those south of
Northport or below Bossburg.
The results of this' survey of agricultural conditions during 1935 establishes
that there was no measurable economic damage to crops on the south side of the
international boundary line.
25. AgriculturalConditions, 1935.-The
report on field conditions 1935,
by Dr. B. L. Richards, set.s forth the resultof a study made in thefield from July
8, 1935, to September 18, 1935, in the Northport area. This report
is set forth
in Appendix D6.
His report is to the effect t h a t t h e economic importance of sulphur dioxi,de
markingsoncropandnativevegetationsouth
of theUnitedStates-#Canadian
borderduringJuly,AugustandSeptember
of 1935 was negligible. Withthe
exception of possible slight markings to alfalfa
a t Robbins', some slight markingsonclover
a t Heindrich's,andmarkings
on a few plants of no economic
importance a t Hennessey's,hedidnotfindoneclear-cutcase
of markings on
a n y of the crops on any farm south of the United States-ICanadian line.
Dr. Richards shows the area in which the slight markings occurred in a map
(Fig. 1) in his report. H e shows on this map also small isolated localities, where
slight, markings appeared on some native vegetation, which localities are indicatedbynumbered circles. Theselocalareas, he stat'es, wouldcomprise but a
small fraction of one per cent of the surrounding unaffected area, and he states
that the markings found in these areas were of no consequence economically.
H e also states that, the greater number of the markings on plants caused by
sulphur dioxide in the Northport area in 1935 occurred on June
18. No additional
markings werefoundonvegetationsubsequent
t o this date until September 9,
a t which time some of these markings occurred a t Mrs. Hennessey's, Mr. Robbins' and Mr. Heindrich's,but a t notimewasanythingmarkedbysulphur
dioxide to the degree t h a t loss was incurred.
26
T R A I L SMELTEH-STATEAIENT
OF PACTS
26. Report on FieldConditions 1935 by Dr. Raymond J. Pool.-Dr.
Pool's report is set forth as Appendix D7.
Dr. Pool made surveys of the crops in the Northport area in 1935, between
July 25 and 31, and agsin between August 19 and 29. Some of his conclusions
may be summarized as follows:--
Generally poor crop conditions in the Northport region and the immea
diatelyadjacentterritory.These
conditionsduemostobviouslyto
deficiency of water supply, poor seed and farming practices.
The total amount of land under cultivation is but a small fraction
of
theentirearea,themost
of the territory being cut-overandburnedover forest which is more or less covered by inferior second-growth.
The whole district has been notably free from economic damagefrom
smelterfumesthissummer.Theonlyundoubtedcases
of sulphur
dioxidc markings found were on the native vegetation near Mrs. Hennessey's farm and on the aspens and serviceberry across the river above
NiggerCreek.Theseoccurredearlyinthesummer,probablyinearIy
June or lateMay,andtheyarealtogether
insignificant in so far as
economic conditions are concerned.
Therewasnotfounda
singlecase of unquestionedsulphurdioxide
or fieldcrop at,anytimeduringhis
spotting on anygarden,orchard
visits to the district.
H e found many leaf lesions andotherabnormalfeaturesinvarious
plants including crops of the field and garden which might be confused
with sulphur dioxide evidences. Many of these were responsible for the
poor showing that was being made by variou's crops.
A great amount of yellow top and various sorts
of chloroticspotting
was observed in the alfalfa both within the district and far removed to
the westward and southward.
A generallydist'ributedyellowing of the native vegetation after midsummer, especially of the conifers and broadleaf shrubs. This condition
was more prominent in areas far removed from the district, as toward
Newport and Spirit lake.
Practically every type of discoloration in every species or variety within
theNorthportdistrictwasreadilymatchedin
t,hesame species or
variety in outlying territory.
His final conclusion is that there was no injury caused by smelter
fumes, gases or smoke from the Trail Smelter during the season of 1935
that justifies any claim for damages.
27. Report on Field Conditions 1935 by Fred Mathews.-Mr. Mathews's
report is set forth in Appendix D8.
Mr. Mathews had made detailed investigations of the farms and vegetatiqn
in thc Northport area. His investigations were conducted over a period of years,
in so far as it was possible t o carry them out in the absence of any complaints as
to damage and in the absence of proper facilities for the examination of affected
areas.
SMELTER-STATEMEKT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
27
Afterthesigning
of thepresentconvention,Mr.Mathewsmade
a more
1935.
detailed study and the report embodies his findings for the year
Mr. Mathews kept close wahch on all the farms in the area and upon the
native vegetation and he did not find at any time during the 1935 growing season
any sulphur dioxide markings on any of the crops, annual or otherwise on any
of the farms, except those belonging to Mr. Robbins and Mr. Herman Heindrich,
neartheinternationalboundarylineandonthesefarmstheextent
of the
markings were so slight that no damage was done thereby.
H e alsofoundslightsulphurdioxidemarkings
on unimportantnative
vegetation near the intcrnational boundary line on the Unitcd States side and
insmalllocalizedareasfurthersouth,butthemarkingswere
so slightand
scattered, even in such areas, as not to be harmful.
Hiscomparison of cropsandothervegetationwithintheareawith
the
samekindoutside
of thearea causedhim to conclude that cropsandother
vegetation of the area involved are equal in quantity and quality to the same
cropsandvegetationinanyotherpart
of Washington or BritishColumbia
where the same type of soil, the same quantity of moisture, the same climatic
conditions and the same care prevail.
'
28. Report on Experiments Conducted at Summerland, 1931, on the
Effect of Sulphur Dioxide on Barley.-This report on experiments conducted
by Dr. Morris Kat,z, is set forth in Appendix D 3.
Barleywas chosen torepresentthegrainclassbecauseitwasknown
to
be one of the most susceptible of crops to sulphur dioxide.
I n andpreviousto 1931 theconcentrations of sulphur dioxide in the area
involvedweremuc,hloweras
a rulethanthosefoundinothersmokeareas
of clear-cut symptoms of sulphur
mentioned in the literature, and the scarcity
dioxide injury,exceptonrelativelyfewoccasionsinthespring,earlysummer
andfall,indicatedtheadvisability
of reproducingfrequent low concentrations
of sulphurdioxidefumigationsonbarleygrowingincabinetsoutsidethearea.
The data given in the report was obtained from
70 experimentsperformed at
Summerland, British Columbia, during the growing season of 1931.
One series of tests aimed to reproduce for that year the gas history
shown
by the Stroh sulphur dioxide recording machine of the Northport area alongside
of which wasanexperimentalplot
of barleywhichwouldbesubject
to the
concentrations of gasindicatedbythemachine.
Some of theresultsandfindingsrnentioncdinthereportare
now briefly
referred to.
When the absorption of sulphur dioxide proceeds slowly, as in the presence
of low concentration of gas, the sulphur dioxide can all be converted to a nontoxic form by oxidation and neutralization and may then
be stored in the leaf
assulphate.Thisaccumulation
of sulphatemayreachavalueseveraltimes
greater than that ordinarily found in plant tissue without injury resulting therefrom. However, in the case of continued fumigations sufficiently long in ,duration
and highinconcentrationtheaccumulation
of sulphatemayreachavalue
whichexceeds the limit of toleranceandthus
cause injury t o the cells by its
effect on the buffer capacity of the system.
*
28
SMELTllR-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
With the humidity 25 to 35 per cent, growing barley may be treated with
0.30 P.p.m. of sulphurdioxidefor 72.6 hourscontinuously,withoutinjury.At
70 per cent relative humidity, chronic injury
or chlorosis is produced after 35.1
hours of fumigation at the same concentration. The chlorotic leaves are capable
ofrecoveringfromthiscondition
if thegasisremoved.
If thehumidityis
increased to 90-95 per cent, the first perceptible signs
of sulphur dioxide injury
begin to appear after 17.3 hours a t 0.30 p.p.m.
At 0.60 p.p.m.growingbarley
shows barelyvisiblemarkingsafter
30.75
hours a t 25-35 per cent relative humidity, 13.6 hours a t 40-50 per cent humidity,
8 hours a t 70 per centhumidity,and
4 hours a t 95 percenthumidity.The
effectofhumidityisverystriking
a t a concentration of 1 * 2 p p m . Here the
first symptoms of sulphur dioxide injury appear in 12.75 hours if the humidity
is as low as 27 per cent, and in 2 . 5 hours if the humidity is 70 per cent.
l’heincreasedresistancetosulphurdioxidemanifestedbybarleywhenin
the flower andheadstageisbroughtoutbythefollowingcomparisonwith
growingbarley. At -60 p.p.m. and 40-50 percentrelativehumidity,barleyin
flower begins to show sulphur dioxide markings after 21 *75 hours whereas under
similarconditionsgrowingbarleyisinjuredin
1 3 - 6 hours.At
70 percent
humiditythe difference insusceptibilityisshownintheratio
of 15.75 hours
to 8 hours at the above concentration.
With regard to the effect of frequently repeated fumigations on plants, the
resultsindicatethatunderconditionscomparablewiththosemetwithinthe
Northportareaduringtheearlypart
of the growingseason of 1931 thefirst
symptoms of sulphurdioxideinjuryonbarleyappearedafter
124 hoursof
fumigation atanaverageconcentration
of 0.29 p.p.m. The maximum concentrationwasashighas
1-05 p.p.m. andconcentrations
of 0.50 to 0.75
occurred a t least once duringeachfumigation.Thefumigationswereapplied
infifteeninstalmentsoveraperiod
of twenty-twodays,commencing
atthe
time the barley was only about
3 inches in height with one
or twoleavesper
plant. When the concentration
of gas is maintained close to the average value
of 0.25 p.p.m.and
“ p e a k ” concentrationsarerelativelyinfrequent,plants
mayendure longer periods of fumigationthanthatindicatedabovewithout
sufferinginjurytothefoliage.
In an experiment ongrowingbarleyconducted
during July and August an average concentration of 0 . 2 6 p.p.m. was maintained
forabout 210 hours, thegas being appliedinsuccessivefumigationsoveran
interval of 29 days. There was no injury produced by this treatment.
Most of theplotswhichhavesufferedonlyslightinjuryasaresult
of
sulphur dioxide treatment show no reduction in yield. When the extent
of the
10 percent, a reductioninyield occurs. I n
leaf injury is greater than about
order to produce crop damage of ten or twenty per cent, severe injury must first
becausedtothe
leaf tissue.Fumigationswhichcauseonlyslightmarkings
are quite without effect on the yield of crop.
The effect of sulphurdioxideontheyieldisintimatelyconnectedwith
the degree and extent of injury to plant foliage. The results
of a large number
of experiments on barleyinvariousstages
of growthpoint tothe conclusion
that sulphur dioxide has no detrimental influence on yield until after markings
appear. From t’his point, on, the growth of the plant bec,omes retarded in propor-
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
29
tion to the extent of markings, bearing in mind its capacity rapidly to replace
damaged tissue under normal
growingconditions if the damage is only
of the
order of a few per cent. If the injury is severe enough to affect over 10 per cent
of the total leaf surface, the plant does not recover completely and crop damage
will result,.
An extendedseriesoffumigations
were administeredoveraperiod
of 40
days commencing at the seedling stage. The total treatment may be represented
by anaverageconcentration
of 0.2'7 p . p m Maximum 1.05 p.p.m. during 214
hours.Slightinjuryoccurred
on five occasions. Theextent of thedamageto
leaf tissueoneachoccasionwastooslightby
itself appreciably to reduce the
yield of crop but the cumulative effect represented probably about 15 per cent
injury t'o t.he leaves. This plot was reduced 14 per cent in yield per plant. The
reduction was entirely in the straw, t'he yield of grain being unaffected.
Anotherpoint that may be mentionedisthe
effect of sulphurdioxide on
thequality of thegrain.
Inthe case of allordinaryfumigationswith
low
concentrations, there is no interference with the normal reproductive
processes,
filling of theheads,andstorage
of carbohydrates.Theproteincontentis
likewiseunaffected.Areductionin
thecarbohydratecontent
of thegrainhas
been found only in the case
of the most severely injured plots, as
a result of
treatmentwith high concentrations of sulphurdioxide.Suchhighconcentrations have seldom, if ever, been found in the Northport area, even previous to
1932. ThegraintakenfromtheStrohbarleyplots
of 1961 showed an exceptionally high starch content.
Inthe aboveexperimentsthesoilmoisturewaskeptin
a condition as
favourable to growth as was practicable. Experiments were also made on plots
where the soilmoisturewasmaintained
at a low level until the plants wilted
forlack of moisture.Twoseries
of experiments were carriedout.Eachseries
consisted of oneplotwithsoilmoisture
low comparedwith an exactlysimilar
plot where the moisture was adequate for growth. The two plots were fumigated
withsimilarconcentration
of sulphurdioxide a t thesametime.Theaverage
percentageabsorption of sulphurdioxidewascalculatedandgreat
differences
were noticeableinthisrespect.Thus,plot
K-11 with low soilmoisturewas
fumigatedwith 1
p,p.m.for 14 hourswithoutinjuryresultingtherefrom,
whereasplot K-9, withadequatemoisture,wasinjuredafter
12 hoursand 315
minutes.Theaveragesulphur
dioxide absorptionfor K-11 was 1.29 percent
during the first 94 hours of fumigation. Plot K-9, however, showed an absorption of 10.8 percent.Thesoilmoisture
of K-9 was 11.1 per cent in the top
6 inches compared with only 1 . 7 per cent in the case of K-11. The stomata of
the plants in the dry plots were almost completelyclosed.
The experiments indicate that plants in
a wilted condition due to lack
of
waterareextremelyresistanttosulphurdioxide.The
effect of high
soil
moisture in increasing the susceptibility
of plants to sulphur dioxideis similar
tothat of high relativehumidity.Probablythemainfactorineachcaseis
the condition of the stomata. When the soil moisture is very
low or the relative
humidity of the atmosphere is low, the leaf stomata tend t o close inorder to
guardagainst excessive transpiration losses. Atsuchtimestherecanbevery
little absorption of sulphur dioxide except by diffusion through the cuticle.
e
2
0
30
T R A I L SMELTER-STATEA'AilENT
OF FACTS
It may beobserved that theseexperimontswereconducted
by Dr. Katz
in 1931 andthereportwasprepared
a t t h a t time.Consequently,inadopting
acomparativepoint
of view, andreproducingconditionsastheywerein
the
Northportarea, Dr. Katz of necessitywascompelled
to reproduceconditions
as they existed before the construction and operation
of remedial measures by
to
theCompany.Consequently,theresults
need to be examinedinrelation
conditions in the years 1'932 to 1935.
A considerat,ion of the records setting forth the content
of sulphur dioxide
B 1 ) )makes it clear that the fumigations in the
in the atmosphere (Appendix
Northport area in the years 1932 to 1935 were not sufficient, either in duration or
in intensity, to produce
economic damage t o susceptiblecerealcrops.Fumigations were all of a character which the foregoing experimental evidence proves
to be innocuous.
2 9 . Report on Experiments Conducted at Summerland, 1935, on the
Effect of Sulphur Dioxide on Alfalfa.-This
report on experiments conducted
by Dr. Morris Katz and Dr.G. ,4.Ledingham, of the National Research Council,
D 4.
is set forth in Appendix
The program of experiments included:-
( a ) The effect of highconcentrations
(1-00 p.p.m. andover) ; medium
concentrations (0.50 to 1-00p.p.m.) ; and low concent'rations (0.10 t o
0.30 p.p.m.) of sulphur dioxide on the growth of alfalfa.
( b ) The effect of humidity,lightandotherfactorsonthesusceptibility
of alfalfa to sulphur dioxide.
(c) Thedetermination of theaverageconcentrationandduratio'nwhich
would be innocuous to alfalfa.
( d ) The effect of dilutesulphur dioxideonsomechemical
constituents of
alfalfa,such as sulphur,nitrogenandcarbohydrates.
Dr. Katz summarizes his conclusions as
follows:Theresults of theexperimentsdescribedinthisreportindicate
that
concentrations of theorder
of 0.10to0.30
p.p.m. may berelatively
innocuousevenafterprolongedtreatmentunderconditionsfavourableto
growthandwhich,asis
shown bytheotherexperimentalevidence,were
favourabletoinjury.
It has beenshown that 0.30 p.p.m. for 664 hours,
0.24 p.p.m. for160 hours, and 0.10 to 0.16 p.p.m. for
500-600 hours may
be appliedtoalfalfawithoutaffectingtheyield.Concentrations
of 0.50
p.p.m. are injurious and affect the yield
of alfalfa if presentcontinuously
for periods of two or more days; higher concentrations, however, may affect
theyield of alfalfain a relativelyshortertime.Theplantsontheother
hand show markedabilitytorecoverfromthe
effects of singleinjurious
fumigations.
Withthe low concentrationsanddurationmentionedabovethereis
no reduction in the protein content
of the leaves, and the total quantity of
carbohydratesremainsunchangedalthoughtheremay
be smallvariations
in the relative amounts of sugars and starch.
'
TRAIL SMELTER-STATEMEKT
OF FACTS
31
Theresults of thisresearchbyDr.Kat2andDr.Ledinghamtakenin
conjunction with the gas history
of the Northport area as recorded in Appendix
B 1 compelsthe conclusion that economic damagehas been eliminatedinthe
ColumbiaValleysouthoftheboundary
as a resultoftheconstructionand
operation of the remedial works.
This is confirmed by the field observations of Dr. Ledingham, Dr. Richards,
D r . PoolandMr.Mathews,
as setforthinAppendices
D 1, D 2, D 6 , D 7,
and D 8.
30. Report on StrohExperimental Plot@,1930 to 1935.-This
report
is Concerned with the results obtained from the experimental plots which were
established at the Stroh farm
in1930. Theyhavebeenunderthesupervision
of ‘Dr. G. A.Ledingham,throughout.Cerealsandalfalfawereselectedfor
planting, and the site was immediately adjacent to the Stroh recorder. Certain
of the plots were irrigated, in order to obtain comparison with the dry sections.
The results obtained in 1930 and 1931, when the emission of sulphur dioxide
at Trail was still a t a high point, form a basis of comparison with those obtained
in1934. In 1930 there was injury to the barley, as a result
of a fumigation on
June 7, when 25 percent of the plants were marked. Tests made, established
that the injury to the whole barley plot, measured in terms of yield, was 5 per
centor less. I n 1931 therewerenomarkingsontheoats,andthemarkings
on wheat and barley were so slight that it was not possible t o find any differentiaof the marked and unmarked plants.
tion between the weights and the heights
The rye plots which were badly marked were the only cereals which hadsufficient
injury to make a reduction in yield seem probable. Dr. Ledingham’s calculation
would justify an assumption that there was about 8 . 4 per cent reduction in the
total yield.
I n 1934 there had been a marked improvement in so far as sulphur dioxide
B 1. Dr. Ledingham’s
conditions were concerned. This is recorded in Appendix
findings with regard to the effect of sulphur dioxide in yields in that year is that
there was noevidencetosuggestthatyieldsontheStrohplotswereaffected
in any way by the presence
of sulphur dioxide in 1934, as the cereals were not
marked at any time during their development. He points out that this conclusion
is inaccordancewiththeresults
of theexperimentalfumigationscarriedout
a t Summerland in 1931.
Tests were made of germination of cerealsgrownon
theStrohplotsin
1930 and 1931,which established that the sulphur dioxideconcentrationsthen
prevalent were without effect on t,he germination of seed grown on the plot. Dr.
Ledingham points out that t,here is, therefore, no reason to expect that any effect
would be caused by the lower concentrations of subsequent years.
I n 1935 the work was restricted to alfalfa. The records
of the alfalfa plots
in 1934 and 1935 indicated that there was no appreciable injury and no evidence
of effect on yields, notwithstanding the existence of some slight markings.
Dr. Ledingharn has set forth the significance of the results obtained from the
Stroh plots in the following words:When the
National
Research
Council
installed
automatic
sulphur
dioxiderecordersintheNorthportarea!itwasconsideredadvisableto
32
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
O F FACTS
plantsmallplots
of cereals andalfalfatokeepunder
closer observation
than wouldbepossibleonfieldsbelonging
to the farmers. By attempting
to rule out extraneous factors such as lack
of water, differences in farming
practice,competitionwith
weeds, andinsectpests,
we hoped to be able
to evaluate the effect of sulphur dioxide on the crops with a greater degree
of accuracy than would ot.herwise be possible. The experiments were never
consideredcomparable to controlledexperimentalfumigationssuchasthe
B.C. Theyhave
CanadianGovernmentlaterconductedatSummerland,
the advantage, however, of being within the actual zone of sulphur dioxide
occurrence from the Trail smelter, and we think it is possible to draw some
conclusions that could not otherwise be obtained in the Nort,hport area.
It is clear from a consideration of the soil moisture records, and yields
on dry and irrigated plots, that lack of moisture was a much greater hazard
inproducingacropthanthepresence
of sulphurdioxide inany of the
yearsunderconsideration.Thereis
someevidence of aslightreduction
in yield in the case of barley in 1930 and rye in 1931. From the results of
an experiment made a t Surnmerland, treating a plot periodically with sulphur
at the
dioxide of comparable concentrations and durations to those recorded
Stroh plot, we are justified in concluding that there was a slight reduction
in the weight of straw, though not of grain on the barley plots. The Stroh
plots sufferedless markingthantheplotatSummerlandhowever.For
details of this experiment see Appendix I> 3, by Dr. Katz.
Since 1931 there is no evidence that sulphur dioxide has been a factor
in decreasing yields on the Stroh plots. Mr. Harris did not report markings
oncereals
in 1932or1933,
andthere werenone
in 1934. Alfalfawas
markedverylightly
a t varioustimesin
1934, butifinjurydid
occur i t
wastoosmallto
be computed.The high yieldsobtainedfromalfalfaare
sufficient proof that there was no damage to this crop.
PART IV-SUMMARY
OF CONCLUSIONS
31. This statement, together with the
followingdocuments,namelyAppendicesA1,A2,A3,A4,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2,C3,C4,D1,D2,D3,D4,
D 5, D 6, D 7, D 8, are subrnitte'd by the 'Government of ICanada, pursuant to
thc provisions of Article V, paragraph2 of theConvention(AppendixA
4),
as a statement of the facts, together with the supporting evidence, relied upon
by the Government of Canada in the present,proceedings. This statement and
thesupportingevidence
will bc supplcmentcdbyotherstatementsandtestimony, oral and documentary, submitted in accordance with t,he provisions of the
Convention.
Summarizing the evidencc, it is submitted that:-
( a ) The construction and operation of thc remedial works by the Company
or dutieswhichmightarise
satisfyanddischargeanyobligations
underthelawandpracticeindealingwithcognatequestionsinthe
United States of America, or by internat'ional law and practice.
SMELTER-STATEMENT
TRAIL
OF FACTS
33
( b ) The result of the construction and operation of the remedial works has
been to reduce sulphur dioxideconditionsin the State of Washington,
both in respect to atmospheric conditions and in respect to the distribution of sulphur dioxide effect within the valley, to the point
a t which
no economic damage has been cause,d since the first dayof January, 1932.
(c) The results of the investigation into the condition of forest vegetation in
the'ColumbiaRivervalley,supplementedbythestudies
of forest
growth and the experiments conducted at Summerland in
1931 on the
effect of sulphurdioxide onYellow pineandDouglasfir,justifythe
conclusion that no economic damage has been caused to forest vegetation in the State of Washington by sulphur dioxide since the first day
of January, 1932.
( d ) Investigations of the effect of sulphur dioxideupon
fiel'd crops and
orchards in the Northport area, the expcriments conducted at Summerland in 1931 and 1935 as to the effect of sulphur dioxide on barley and
alfalfa,andthestudies
of theStro,hexperimentalplots,establish
t h a t no economic damage has beencaused to field crops and orchaads
intheState
of WashingtonbytheTrailSmeltersincethefirstday
of January, 1932.
( e ) There is arestrictedareaintheupperpart
of theColumbiavalley
near the boundary, within which slight and insignificant markings
on
the most sensitive types of forest vegetation may have been caused by
sulphur dioxide from the Trail Smelter since the first day
of January,
1932, andin which thereissomeevidencethattheannualrate
of
growth of Douglas fir has not completely recovered from the conditions
which obtained before 19132. The evidence establishes t h a t even within
this restricted area no
economic damage has beencaused in the State
of Washington from the Trail Smelter since the first day
of January,
1932.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
J. E. READ,
Agent for the Government of Canada.