Letters: Sewage net benefit analysis a must

Project should not go ahead without scientific proof it's needed

Nice to see some meaty investigative reporting in the Oak Bay News!

As I am “one of the minority” (not sure how you arrived at the statement that the majority want sewage treatment…I know of no-one in my circle of friends and acquaintances), I am curious that the science-based “no treatment required for many years, if ever” side of this story warranted one sentence in your first article.

I suggest that when doing your next Sewage in the CRD timeline that you include the evidence-based information supplied by many scientists.

Also David Anderson’s op-ed pieces in the Victoria media recently have been very good at summarizing this whole situation.

Until there has been a net benefit analysis done (benefit to the ocean environment at what cost both in dollars and to the land and air environment), I cannot understand how this can go ahead.

We need to ask the governments for an exemption as has been done in places such as San Diego, California.

And finally, I am amazed that Washington State officials feel that they can dictate to us about the ocean environment when Puget Sound is a polluted mess because there is not the same marine receiving environment with large currents to flush waste efficiently.

Jennie Sutton

Oak Bay