In meeting with other New England governors and eastern Canada premiers this weekend, Gov. Angus King has an opportunity to continue Maine’s first steps in reducing mercury use and pollution. He should use this meeting to reassert the state’s concern about this toxin and urge fellow leaders to join him in supporting model legislation drafted by their own staff.

The governors and premiers today in Halifax will consider a proposal created by the Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association, which is made up of state environmental staff from New England and New York. Their plan calls for the reduction or elimination of mercury in certain consumer products, including fever thermometers and other measuring devices, some switches and electronic products. The plan would add to Maine’s mercury recycling law, passed last session as a tepid start to dealing with this serious problem.

Mercury, in both its elemental form and as the more toxic methylmercury, is becoming more dangerous as humans are increasingly exposed to it through discharges from power plants, especially coal, and the burning of municipal waste. Mercury is harmful to the nervous system, particularly to a fetus or small child, and exposure causes developmental delays or, in more serious cases, blindness, deafness and kidney damage. The tissue of wildlife measured in Maine has shown it to have some of the highest levels of mercury in North America.

The response to the Northeast model legislation has been reported as tepid, meaning that the governors and premiers might wish to talk about something else today. That would be a mistake, as the recent findings from the National Academy of Sciences made clear this week. Eighteen months after Congress balked at tougher mercury rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency and instead asked the NAS to review the dangers from mercury, the answers come back more clearly than ever: “Each year about 60,000 children may be born in the United States with neurological problems that could lead to poor school performance because of exposure to methylmercury in utero,” according to its report. The EPA, if anything, was too easy.

This conclusion has led Sen. Olympia Snowe to urge colleagues earlier this week to speed up the process for reviewing mercury restrictions. And Rep. Tom Allen has been a consistent supporter of proposals that would establish a 95 percent reduction of mercury for utility power plants, commercial and industrial boilers, waste incinerators and other facilities that emit mercury to the environment. A second bill he introduced would end the ability of utilities, mostly in the Midwest, to continue to emit pollutants including mercury.

The NAS report has direct implications for Maine, although on a smaller scale. Officials at the Bureau of Health are trying to broadcast the message that pregnant women and children under age 8 should limit their consumption of freshwater fish, in which mercury accumulates, to one serving a month and the rest of the population to one serving a week. The NAS conclusions align with the numbers generated by the bureau, which still is left with the question of finding the simplest way of getting out the warning that Maine’s high levels of mercury, which can vary by species of fish and within species, make all but the smallest consumption potentially dangerous.

A blanket warning of no consumption by these vulnerable groups, as advised by environmental groups such as the Toxics Action Coalition, may be easiest considering the short amount of time involved (especially assuming that pregnant women in their first trimesters aren’t thinking fish when they think about dinner).

The governors and premiers have a chance to lead the region on this serious health problem and should continue to find ways to take this toxin out of household products. Their staff has provided them with a useful blueprint to begin.