Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Thursday, August 13, 2015

The Animas River Spill (Updated)

3,000,000 gallons of polluted mine waste water were released:

The Animas River after the spill caused by the EPA

For your consideration (Click directly on the image below the fold to enlarge it):

The above letter to the editor appeared in the print edition of the Silverton Standard & the Miner on July 30, 2015.

The 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill occurred on August 5, 2015:
[W]hen trying to add a tap to the tailing pond for the mine, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) workers accidentally destroyed the dam holding back the pond, spilling 3,000,000 US gallons (11,000,000 L) of polluted mine waste water and tailings, including heavy metals such as cadmium and lead, and other elements, such as arsenic, into Cement Creek, a tributary of the Animas River in Colorado.  The EPA was criticized for not warning Colorado and New Mexico until the day after the waste water spilled.
Gateway Pundit has commented as follows (emphases mine):
This letter to editor...was published in The Silverton Standard and The Miner local newspaper, authored by a retired geologist, one week before EPA mine spill. The letter detailed verbatim, how EPA officials would foul up the Animas River on purpose in order to secure superfund money. If the Gold King mine was declared a superfund site it would essentially kill future development for the mining industry in the area. The Obama EPA is vehemently opposed to mining and development.

The EPA pushed for nearly 25 years, to apply its Superfund program to the Gold King mine. If a leak occurred the EPA would then receive superfund status. That is exactly what happened.
Quite a coincidence, huh?

UPDATE ***  UPDATE ***  UPDATE

Months ago, Colo. town resisted allowing EPA tests that caused toxic disaster:
Five months before the Animas River toxic spill disaster, leaders from the tiny Colorado mining town of Silverton pleaded with EPA officials to not perform tests that would declare the area a Superfund site.

Yet the Environmental Protection Agency was intent on ferreting out “widespread soil contamination” from historic mines, even though the town was tested five years ago and no problems were found....

31 comments:

  1. Any privately held organization that did this would be fined out of existence.
    We should do the same to the EPA.

    Bureaucratic manipulation to reach a desired goal.
    That's unheard of!

    ReplyDelete
  2. When is President Obama going to fire the head of the EPA and the people on the ground there?

    Poking a retaining wall with a backhoe, and having no contingency plans, and now drinking water people rely upon in 4 states is contaminated.

    If Katrina was local government incompetence writ large, this is a horrible visual of what federal incompetence can do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SF,
      When does Obama ever fire anyone who screws up?

      As you mentioned, there is now big trouble for people living in 4 states. Red states?

      Delete
  3. Not tp make light of this disgusting, unnecessary tragedy, but this thought from an old TV commercial springs instantly to mind:

    "It's not NICE to fool around with Mother Nature."

    Obviously, it's not SMART either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FT,
      It looks to me as if the EPA did far more damage than the mining did. If locals know otherwise, please chime in.

      Delete
  4. The EPA should fine itself into oblivion but I'm sure not holding my breath!

    ReplyDelete
  5. AOW, you've again "drilled down" to the real agenda. The EPA, like many government agencies set up ostensibly to protect the public (e.g. FDA, FAA), actually behave in ways which show that you and I and the people of Silverton are not their constituents at all.

    Whoever they work for, it ain't us. To continue to believe otherwise in the face of relentless evidence is not wise.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just shared Levin's message with many.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Everybody's right......this is so horrendous and far reaching. It's a terrible situation for those people affected!
    Plus, imagine the HUUUGE money our tax dollars will be paying out for the EPA's ridiculous mistake? I honestly hope they sue the drillers, too. They would have known better....they must have known.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Z,
      I'm not convinced that what the EPA did was an accident.

      Have you heard in the mainstream media anything about the letter to the editor referenced in the body of the blog post? I haven't heard anything, but I've been all consumed by with various doctors' appointments this week, so I would likely have missed any such story.

      Delete
    2. You know, AOW, as illegal and bad as this administration's been it's hard for me to believe anybody'd cause this horrible destruction to nature and people on purpose for anything.......
      It looks like Silverfiddle understood it the way I did, too....it's just hard to BELIEVE that this is all purposeful.....sickening. But I'm certainly open to hearing more.
      Except we probably won't. Let's hope the govs of this state blow the lid on it...or one of the machine operators admits it was done purposefully....

      But, we see how carefully Benghazi's been covered up, NSA, the Veteran's Administration, Lois Lerner (who's now calling Republicans nasty names because she must feel she's escaped somehow), etc etc. so what we know now about this environmental nightmare might be all we ever learn.

      Delete
  8. When the information in the body of the blog post first popped up at Gateway Pundit. I looked around for confirmation, which I found. Gateway Pundit was correct!

    ReplyDelete
  9. The damage is horrible - so much more than the EPA would ever allow a private party. The lead and other heavy metals are hundreds of times above 'safe' limits. I was reading the IBD editorial on this just now and thinking "how on earth could such an' accident' happen?" Your revelation is chilling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There're other implications, too. Think about:

      * Fresh water - who has access, who profits.
      * Worsening health of Americans - heavy metal poisoning from multiple sources across the country. Who might this benefit and how?

      Delete
  10. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/13/months-ago-colo-town-resisted-allowing-epa-tests-that-caused-toxic-disaster/?intcmp=hplnws

    There's a federal lawsuit being considered, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yaa..I thought that was pretty pertinent, too!

      Anybody seeing much of this in the news? I watch all 3 cables and haven't seen it for DAYS....

      Delete
    2. Z,
      I haven't seen what we've been discussing on any of the TV news outlets.

      Delete
  11. All those reading this thread should read the link that Z left at 6:52 PM!

    ReplyDelete
  12. * Who benefits from the clean up?

    *Who benefits from management of a SuperFund?

    * Which individuals within EPA management should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

    Tammy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tammy,
      I'm not sure, but I think that I read this morning that the same company who breached the dam is also a clean-up company.

      Delete
  13. UPDATE (ALSO ADDED TO THE BODY OF THE BLOG POST):

    Months ago, Colo. town resisted allowing EPA tests that caused toxic disaster:

    Five months before the Animas River toxic spill disaster, leaders from the tiny Colorado mining town of Silverton pleaded with EPA officials to not perform tests that would declare the area a Superfund site.

    Yet the Environmental Protection Agency was intent on ferreting out “widespread soil contamination” from historic mines, even though the town was tested five years ago and no problems were found....


    ReplyDelete
  14. The EPA is just another ideological front for the Marxist and aggressive land ownership program of the Obama administration.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think so, too.

      The EPA clamps down so hard on private property rights that it's hardly worth it to own private property.

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective