Archive for March, 2016

POLLUTED AGENCY?

March 22, 2016

There’s an article in the 17th March 2016 edition of The Craven Herald and Pioneer regarding a pollution incident of a local river. Discharge from a quarry has been blamed for the pollution at Ingleton in Yorkshire. The Environment Agency responded to nine complaints of discolouration of the river Greta and Doe from members of the public. The agency states that there were approximately six kilometres of watercourse visibly affected by the pollution and “There are no known fish or long-term disruption to aquatic life.” They also state, “As the material didn’t appear to settle quickly, impacts of pollution are believed to be short term, with little to no long term deposition of material. Heavy rain overnight on February 29, and the morning of March 1, would have likely removed any remaining deposits.” They are also working with the quarry to determine the exact cause for the discharge and ways to prevent a recurrence.”

This is not good enough: There’s no mention as to what substance was causing the pollution or whether samples had been taken for analysis.

“There are no known fish or long term disruption to aquatic life.” Were tests or monitoring carried out?

“As the material didn’t appear to settle quickly, impacts of pollution are believed to be short term, with little or no long term deposition of material. Did any material settle? Has there been any impact?

Heavy rain overnight on February 29, and the morning of March 1, would have likely removed any remaining deposits.”

This blasé attitude is inappropriate.

It is the duty of the Environment Agency to take these incidents seriously and to report to the public their findings after scientifically determining the nature of the pollutant – not to fob us off with guesswork or wishful thinking.

ANOTHER CASE:

https://www.rt.com/viral/358561-red-river-siberia-norilsk/