Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
Tue Apr 9, 2013, 07:56 PM Apr 2013

About a third of US rivers contaminated with agricultural runoff


by Scott K. Johnson

At least our rivers don’t light on fire anymore. Inspired by a well-publicized fire on the Cuyahoga River in 1969, the passage of the Clean Water Act in the US led to huge reductions in water pollution. Despite those positive strides, maintaining water quality requires ongoing attention. A new survey of streams and rivers, performed by the EPA, provides a greater sense of the scale of the challenge. While industrial pollution, like mercury, remains a concern, agricultural runoff, in the form of sediment and fertilizers, is now far more widespread.

Water quality monitoring is performed by states using a variety of methods, which can make it difficult to accurately compile the national picture. The US Environmental Protection Agency has started carrying out nation-wide surveys to provide consistent, standardized snapshots of water quality. Following on the heels of the 2006 Wadeable Streams Assessment, the EPA recently released a draft comprehensive survey of streams and rivers.

The legwork was carried out in 2008 and 2009 by 85 crews that visited 1,924 sites in the lower 48 states. The sites were selected at random using an algorithm that ensured a representative sample. At each site, crews evaluated the stream’s surroundings, inventoried the species present, and collected samples for chemical analysis.

To turn all this data into a simplified assessment of stream health, ratings of “good”, “fair”, and “poor” were assigned. The tricky part is settling on a definition of what constitutes “good”. Good relative to its neighbors? Or what it could be if human impacts were limited? Or what it was like before human modification?

more
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/about-a-third-of-us-rivers-contaminated-with-agricultural-runoff/
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
About a third of US rivers contaminated with agricultural runoff (Original Post) n2doc Apr 2013 OP
I'd bet the percentage is higher. Sickening either way. nt Mnemosyne Apr 2013 #1
k & r stuntcat Apr 2013 #2

stuntcat

(12,022 posts)
2. k & r
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 06:25 PM
Apr 2013
for everyone still eating the meat that's raping the hell out of this planet.


Indeed.. "fecal matter"
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»About a third of US river...