SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (442782)12/27/2008 9:28:01 AM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) of 1575771
 
"You're conflating several concepts. First, just because the fish die out in a river for a spell doesn't mean that (a) humans caused it or (b) it is a big deal."

No conflation. Humans were directly the cause. Primarily paper mills. The effluent was high in organics and that caused a depletion in oxygen in the water column. Now, I am guessing you are sort of weak on the chemical and biological side, but the lack of oxygen meant that fish couldn't live.

But, the fish were just a symptom. The Neches flows into Sabine Lake. Which is one of the major estuaries on the Texas Gulf Coast. That anoxic water(that means water with little or no oxygen) along with its load of organics flowed into the marshes there. Now marshes are the primary breeding grounds for the fish and other marine organisms in the Gulf. That directly impacted the yield of oysters, shrimp, fish and crabs in the area. Because, you see, many of the marine fauna of economic significance do not breed in the open ocean, but do so in the marshes. Which are already under pressure because people like to plant houses on them. So there was a significant economic impact.

In other words, it is indisputably stupid to say that killing a river is of no consequences.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext