Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jigman13
Does removing the mud offer a solution or create a short-term problem, kicking the contaminants up and re-introducing them back into the flow of the river? What are the effects of said contaminants on the current and future fish populations of the mighty PR?
I know what the long term angle is--clean up the river. I feel as if, from an investigative report standpoint, several additional questions should have been raised and addressed. But I certainly do not oppose the long term goal.
|
You are never going to remove 100% of the contaminated silt from the river. Some will not be able to be accessed due to engineering limitations. Others, like you said, will be lost to the flow of the river and redistributed further downstream. Likely, the disturbance of the sediments will create a short-lived spike in waterborne contamination, but will ultimately benefit water quality. Current aquatic life may accumulate additional contamination in their tissue as a result, but should otherwise be able to live fairly normally. As long as their is sufficient food and oxygen, fish can live with quite a bit of pollution in their systems before they die off.
__________________
Now the sun is just starting to climb up over the treetops,
And it's gonna be a beautiful day, that's plain to see.
But I won't be around at all, so don't even bother to call,
Cause on a day like today there's one place I gotta be:
GONE FISHIN'
Fishing with LardAlmighty on YouTube
