Not too many years ago, mobile phones that were available to the public were large, bulky units generally permanently installed in commercial vehicles to help the work world keep in touch. Mobile, in this case, meant a phone not in a building, but in a vehicle, more along the lines of military radios.
Since then, of course, those now-antiquated phones have morphed into the must-have device of the communications world. Cellphones have quickly moved from expensive novelty item to for-emergency items to being an integral cog in the lives of most people.
The popularity of cellphones has grown (exploded?) to the point where, with their numbers exponentially increasing, their reliance as the modern communications device of choice has sometimes been the cause of angst among those who can get a signal.
Like it or not, cellphone use is now the accepted method of staying in touch.
The thing is, how bad do we need to stay in touch via our cellphones?
Do we need the full array of bars, no missed calls, internet and social media access even if it means installing cellphone towers near schools? In this case, near Lawrence Grassi School?
Much like the situation of some years ago, when there were concerns that electomagnetic fields caused by stepdown transformers along powerlines were causing leukemia in children living nearby, the idea of kids being constantly bombarded by cellphone waves is being looked at very seriously.
At that time, reams of reports were generated after epidemiological and population studies were launched. Results were examined, interpreted as per which side of the issue one stood on, and ongoing arguments ensuded.
In Canmore, the idea of a temporary Telus cellphone tower becoming permanent has nearby residents and parents of schoolchildren concerned.
Understandably, Canadian Rockies Public Schools isn’t keen on having its students – all in their places with bright, shiny faces – being bombarded by radio frequency radiation from half a block away.
The idea that long-term exposure to cell tower-related radiation or waves could be harmful to children in the community should be enough to cause anyone concern.
As outgoing CRPS superintendent Brian Callaghan reported to the school board, Telus may be following Industry Canada and Health Canada standards, but European research and standards are moving forward.
Further, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
Whether or not there is concrete scientfic evidence regarding harmful effects of cellphone towers, Telus has done the right thing in not pushing forward its agenda of having the tower in question made permanent.
The fact that Industry Canada requires a public consultation process for towers of 15 metres or more, whereas the Telus tower is 14.9 metres, has clearly been seen as suspicious by some in the community.
In being a good corporate citizen Telus, though they did have a June 15 deadline for input place, have postponed that until fall, which will allow public input.
Here at RMO, we realize many people rely solely on their cellphone as a means of communication, but we find it unlikely that more favourable sites for cellphone towers can’t be found.
There are areas of town that are less populated, even industrial in nature, that could take priority. We’re not wizards of cell tower coverage areas, of course, but if any other possible locations may be suitable, let’s take a serious look.
