Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan@CU
Are they really serious?  |
The article wasn't written as comedy. Here are some quotes:
Quote:
"But what about the possibility that this rapid progression may be disrespecting many Chinese people of Sacramento's early years, who lived in the railyards area and may have been buried in the very soil that is finding a new home in Utah?"
"Kanelos added that he is concerned that the community is not well informed about how highly toxic the soil is at the railyards, considering that the reason that soil is being sent to Utah is because of its highly toxic contents.
"An early railyards EIR report [sic] states that "landfills outside of California do not recognize California hazardous waste regulations" and "they frequently accept wastes that would be considered hazardous in California, but are not hazardous wastes according to federal standards."
|
The article presents some arguments that there may have been a Chinese cemetery somewhere in the vicinity of China Slough, but so far nobody is sure where the exact location of this cemetery might be, and nobody has found anything yet to pinpoint exactly where it is. They don't come right out and say that the railyards shouldn't be developed, but the main points of discussion are that (a) digging out the toxic material is somehow a greater environmental threat than leaving it in, and (b) there is a chance that human remains from an unknown graveyard might be shipped to Utah.
Reading the article as a historian, there are holes in the arguments that I could drive a truck through, but journalists are not held to the same standards as historians.