• TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Removing silt can be pretty bad in some cases, heavy metals sink to the bottom and will not cause problems if left undisturbed, if you start removing silt you will make those pollutants bioavailable again.

    • Bluewing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Even removing the branches and larger tree limbs can cause issues with removing habitat for aquatic critters and changes the currents and flow of the river.

      Cleaning the trash by hand and hauling it away is one thing. They went beyond that.

    • teyrnon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      In this case the silt is a good share shit overflows from sewage releases though, which go unpunished I would add.

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I wasn’t aware of that. I suspect the guy in question didn’t either. That’s why experts should make those decisions who do know that stuff.

      • teyrnon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Do you think the government environmental agency is trustworthy? You do realize the neoliberals are in bed with big money.

        There is zero fucking chance of “experts” working in the public interest at the EA. 0%.

        • luciferofastora@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I mean, the agency did drag its feet until the guy got pissed enough to do something irresponsible. Doesn’t excuse his actions, nor does it make him an expert either.

          If he had an expert advising him on this course of action, cool. The articles don’t seem to mention it, and the articles prey on outrage, so saying “he even had an expert telling him to do so!” would have been worth a note.

          So if you’re right, we’ve got two bunches of idiots; one negligent in their inaction, the other reckless in their action.

        • stickly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You don’t have to work for a three letter agency to be an expert. I guarantee you that if they took the time to consult anyone remotely connected to ecological science they would have said no to hacking up the river bed without a proper survey and sampling.