Letters

07/29/2009 10:00 PM

By JILL B. HORIST

No Comments - Add Your Comment

Column misstates river history

While many of the points in Margaret Frisbie’s “Recovering river needs protection” (Chicago Journal, “July 23) are well-founded, in too many instances she obfuscates the truth and thereby misleads readers. Reasonable people can have differing points of view regarding the Chicago River—then and now—but one cannot eschew history. Historians like Libby Hill reference with certainty that significant portions of the river were “a weedy ditch too shallow to put on maps.”


Ms. Frisibe falsely claims that the swamp muck of the North Branch (historically described by contractors of the day) was a natural landscape that has been “mistreated for over a century.” While she attempts to rewrite history, facts are facts. The size and health of the river and its connecting waterways are the result of Metropolitan Water Reclamation District engineering. There is nothing natural about them. These waterways operate as the urban drainage and conveyance system for the equivalent of ten million people. As built, they were never intended for recreation, yet today sports activities take place on them—a testament to the condition of these waterways.


For Ms. Frisibe to state that the MWRD “needs to start disinfecting the millions of bacteria-laden sewage” suggests that she is misinformed about the public health responsibilities of our agency. For the record, MWRD is responsible for maintaining the quality of these artificial waterways. These waterways are 70 percent treated water, which is released at 95 to 98 percent clean.


We agree: “The river is wonderful.” It’s a regional asset. Taking a clear look at the river today, Ms. Frisbie and others should be able to see the results of MWRD’s long-time vision. The river is vital, productive and as “natural” as it can be. Make no mistake, however; it is not “wild” as Ms. Frisbie portrays. Never was; never will be.


No Comments - Add Your Comment