This Week in Government Accountability
[guest post by JVW]
Earlier today the Environmental Polluting Agency — oh wait, I guess that’s supposed to be Environmental Protection Agency — along with the their enablers and co-conspirators in the Justice Department decided to deny claims from parties hurt by the pollution of the Animas River in the Four Corners area when an EPA clean-up team triggered a spill of wastewater from the abandoned Gold King Mine near Silverton, Colorado. A total of 73 claims have been filed, but the EPA/DOJ team has rejected them all under the principle of sovereign immunity.
I happened to be in Durango when the mine spill occurred. The three million gallons of wastewater let loose into the river included lead, copper, iron, aluminum, and other typical mining debris. The pictures were published far and wide, but here is an great juxtaposition of what the Animas looked like before and after the spill:
I can assure you that it looked far worse in person. I first heard about the spill at a Durango brewery the night it happened, but I was still unprepared for just how awful the river looked for miles and miles in the next morning’s sunlight. Already at that point the locals were discussing how the fall whitewater rafting tourism business was hopelessly screwed, and I later heard that Durango suffered through a very unprosperous autumn.
The EPA/DOJ axis has helpfully declared that affected parties can seek relief from courts, or they can petition Congress to pass legislation making them whole. This follows on the heels of the decision by the U.S. Attorney in Denver last October not to seek the prosecution of the EPA official deemed to be the most responsible for the disaster. The U.S. Attorney declared that the matter of the official’s sanction should be left up to the Agency, and one does not have to be a cynic to guess that the “punishment,” such that it is, will be an early retirement at full pension or a lateral move within another governmental agency.
Unluckily for the EPA, their spill strongly affected two Hillary Clinton states, Colorado and New Mexico, and it infringed upon a certified preferred victims group, Native Americans. So the Democrats, who otherwise can be counted on to exculpate any bureaucratic malfeasance by a government agency, now have to actually demand a modicum of accountability from their staunchest backers.
A helpful suggestion for Congress: the EPA has an $8.2 billion proposed budget for 2017. Congress should propose to take $600 million from the budget for each of the next two years in order to pay the $1.2 billion in claims that have already been filed.
– JVW
You really wouldn’t have believed how awful that sludge looked flowing down the river.
JVW (6e49ce) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:43 pmMy favorite part is how they are immune to any financial responsibility because their actions were due to their considered judgment.
One rule for them, one for everyone else.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:21 pm“A helpful suggestion for Congress: the EPA has an $8.2 billion proposed budget for 2017. Congress should propose to take $600 million from the budget …”
Should read, “a helpful suggestion to Congress: Completely defund and eliminate the EPA and let the individual state DEPs do the job that the US Constitution delegates to them.”
Joel Walbert (117207) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:26 pmColorado and New Mexico voted affirmatively resoundingly consistently for this level of government accountabilty.
You wanted more government. Now you’re getting it. Good and hard.
Raise your hand if you want seconds.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:04 amShould read, “a helpful suggestion to Congress: Completely defund and eliminate the EPA and let the individual state DEPs do the job that the US Constitution delegates to them.”
I know, and I admire the sentiment, but we have to operate within the realm of possibility here.
JVW (6e49ce) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:38 am@1. Looks like Silverton meets Bayonne.
The image speaks a thousand words but I gotta ask, how did it smell?
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:41 amThis river flows south to the San Juan River which then flows westward into Lake Powell. So this isn’t just a Colorado problem. The Republicans really do need to spend some time disciplining the EPA, and this would be a good starting point.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:35 amThe realm Of possibility has suddenly, greatly expanded.
Donald (3373e9) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:57 am“Congress should propose to take $600 million from the budget for each of the next two years in order to pay the $1.2 billion in claims that have already been filed.”
Sad to see this here. You writing this shows that even the right reasons from major premises set by the left. In the result, only leftist conclusions are possible.
Joel Walbert is correct.
And with Trump, despite the caterwauling here, everything is possible.
Fred Z (b0a041) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:05 amThe EPA did this once. Before the EPA, the mines were releasing every conceivable poison, up to and including cyanide, into rivers and streams on a daily basis. Poisoning the land, and killing people, livestock, and crops, downstream for hundreds of miles. And mines were the small part of the pollution. Ask the people of Kankakee about the water quality Chicago was gifting them. Love Canal?
Where was the Army Corps of Engineers in all this, BTW? I thought it owned all the running water in the United States.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:20 amThe official says they want to be sure they don’t operate in fear of being sued. Gah!!
I’ve spent time in Durango, too. Beautiful, gorgeous place. With a poisoned river, not so much.
Patricia (5fc097) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:41 amAs with the ixtap spill, courtesy of Pemex thirty one years before trans union, they made the same mistake, it took a hurricane to finally clean up the mess.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:50 amBefore the EPA, the mines were capped
releasing every conceivable poison, into rivers and streams on a daily basis.Or if you prefer.
After the EPA tore open the mine (singular) it has gushed every conceivable poison, up to and including cyanide, into rivers and streams on a daily basis. Poisoning the land, and killing people, livestock, and crops, downstream for hundreds of miles.
Sorry = had to clean that up for you a bit.
Try to be more careful in future.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:04 amYes mother nature has all sorts of nasty surprises, but when the got pulls a hazelwood its all good.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:10 amThis was simply a mistake. Now if this happened often, but it almost never does, then there would indeed be a problem. But I do not believe that this was intentional, at all.
Besides, what are we supposed to do, throw up our hands and say “OK businesses, police your own polluting since you have such a great record of being conscientious about it.” Dude, please.
Tillman (a95660) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:21 amBy the way, I live in Colorado and I’m more upset that we have to buy our drinking water. In our area, an entire aquifer was poisoned. I don’t know if it was from a business or the military, but it was one or the other.
Tillman (a95660) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:25 amI,m surprised you’re not too high to know the difference.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:27 amI don’t think anyone actually died as a direct result of the EPA ripping open the mine.
Local experts knew what was going to happen and strenuously vociferously warned against the rash action. The EPA insisted, taking council with their considered judgement possibly.
The backhoe operator jumped clear, leaving the rental yards equipment as the only direct casualty.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:34 am#15 Tillman, there you go carrying water for the Barack Administration again.
We’ll just refer to you as Jill, as you carry a pail a water up the hill for your sweetheart Barack.
When a business does something like this, the government punishes them. But when the government does something like this, who punishes them?
This sort of thing only needs to happen once for it to be a problem.
I love how Obama’s federal agencies want to redefine every mud puddle on private property as a “waterway,” yet when the feds poison rivers they just want everyone to accept their explanation that, “Hey, it was a mistake — let’s all chill out about it and be friends!”
These are the same federal knuckleheads who harass ranchers and farmers throughout the west, including with such insanity as the Delta Smelt at the expense of human livelihoods.
That’s Progressivism 101 — placing ideas ahead of people.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:48 amnk, “before the EPA …. blah blah blah ”
You can make up anything you want “before the EPA.” And the worse the EPA behaves, the more fantastic your tales will become. Ghost Busters saw these kinds of problems coming 30 years ago.
We are living “after the EPA”, and more attention needs to be paid to their unaccountable, irresponsible, politically motivated behavior. They are part of the problem now.
FredZ, what premises and who in the heck is Joel Walbert. The few hits I got on Google don’t provide many clues.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:53 amJust terrible, but typical. Imagine if this happened under Trump? They’d be protesting hourly!
I’d love a constitutional amendment “No government subdivision, agent or person acting under authority of the government shall be immune from prosecution or suits, and the doctrines of sovereign immunity, absolutely immunity, qualified immunity, and any related immunities are expressly prohibited from use.”
Patrick Henry, the 2nd (2ab6f6) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:54 amYou know what I meant, papertiger, and Californians who are surviving on stolen water from the surrounding states should be careful how they talk about the federal government which steals it for them.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:56 amIn EPA rebuke, judge orders quick evaluation on coal jobs.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — A judge has ordered federal regulators to quickly evaluate how many power plant and coal mining jobs are lost because of air pollution regulations.
“EPA does not get to decide whether compliance with (the law) is good policy, or would lead to too many difficulties for the agency,” [U.S. District Judge John Preston] Bailey wrote. “It is time for the EPA to recognize that Congress makes the law, and EPA must not only enforce the law, it must obey it.”
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:02 amI live in Jefferson, buddy. We get our water the old fashion way. Trickle down aquanomics.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:05 am@nk:Love Canal?
Interesting you use that as an example. Love Canal had no water in it, it was a filled in waste disposal site. It was breached by the government very similarly to this case.
tl; dr: A school district wanted to build a school on it. The company refused to sell because of the hazardous waste once stored there. The school district threatened to use eminent domain to seize the property, so the company sold only on the condition that many, many documents be signed saying that the district knew the risks and what not to do on the cite. School district ignored it anyway.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:06 amThis was simply a mistake. Now if this happened often, but it almost never does, then there would indeed be a problem. But I do not believe that this was intentional, at all.
You’re not surprisingly missing the point, Tillman. When a business fouls the environment like this it is fined billions of dollars, the company heads are hauled up in front of Congress, and they have to deal with the PR nightmare. When your friendly government does this they just shrug their collective shoulders and say, “OK, taxpayer, you pay for it,” but no one ever loses their job or faces civil or criminal prosecution. Some of us understand the inherent unfairness of this.
At the very least the message should go out to EPA workers that we’re sorry, but your agency screwed up royally and as a result there are going to be hiring and salary freezes for the next three or four years while we pay for the mess you created. It’s a pity if that causes them to lose competent employees, but there needs to be consequences for this incompetence. If you are indeed a Coloradan, Tillman, then you probably know that the EPA had been warned that their sloppy cleanup efforts could very possibly trigger this exact sort of ecological disaster.
JVW (6e49ce) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:07 amHooker sold Love Canal, under threat of seizure by eminent domain, for 1$ in 1953, and the deed contains this interesting language:
Prior to the delivery of this instrument of conveyance, the grantee herein has been advised by the grantor that the premises above described have been filled, in whole or in part, to the present grade level thereof with waste products resulting from the manufacturing of chemicals by the grantor at its plant in the City of Niagara Falls, New York, and the grantee assumes all risk and liability incident to the use thereof. It is therefore understood and agreed that, as a part of the consideration for this conveyance and as a condition thereof, no claim, suit, action or demand of any nature whatsoever shall ever be made by the grantee, its successors or assigns, against the grantor, its successors or assigns, for injury to a person or persons, including death resulting therefrom, or loss of or damage to property caused by, in connection with or by reason of the presence of said industrial wastes. It is further agreed as a condition hereof that each subsequent conveyance of the aforesaid lands shall be made subject to the foregoing provisions and conditions.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:08 amAfter the OPM allowed the Chinese government to grab the security clearance questionnaires from 21 million Americans, including many digital fingerprints and truthfully answered questions about sexuality and drug use, and didn’t fire (let alone take-out-and-shoot) anyone, this kind of bureaucratic stonewall does not come as any surprise.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:08 amGreetings:
But otherwise, the Obama administration was pretty much as success, no ???
11B40 (6abb5c) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:08 amThe School Board, however, ultimately refused to accept the special provisions proposed by Hooker concerning the use of the property. Hooker wanted to require that the donated premises “be used for park purposes only, in conjunction with a school building to be constructed upon premises in proximity to” them. And it wanted the Board to agree that, should the property ever cease serving as a park, title to it would revert to Hooker. Instead of these restrictions, which the Board rejected, the company had to settle for the liability provisions and warnings in the last paragraph of the deed hammered out in meetings between Hooker and Board representatives.
On April 28, 1953, Hooker’s secretary and general counsel, Ansley Wilcox—the same man who later, as the company’s vice-president and general counsel, was to be the author of the letter read out at the meeting of the Board of Ed on November 21, 1957—submitted to the Board the final draft of the deed. Nine days later, the Board’s attorney, Mr. Boniello, wrote to the Board that, because of the provisions contained in the deed’s closing paragraph, “In the event that the Board shall accept this deed, it is my opinion that there is placed upon the Board the risk and possible liability to persons and/or property injured or damaged as a result thereof arising out of the presence and existence of the waste products and chemicals upon the said lands referred to in the said deed. ” In short, the Board’s own attorney at the time was emphasizing to his client that if it were to accept the Canal it would be getting as part of the package liability for personal and property damage, as ultimately happened to homeowners in the area surrounding the Love Canal.
Nonetheless, on May 7, 1953, the Board voted unanimously to accept the deed. Similarly, the Board had voted unanimously to accept the deed to the site of the 66th Street School; that deed’s reference to radioactivity at the site served as no deterrent either. Both sites, incidentally, had already, on December 30, 1952, been approved by the Niagara Falls Planning Board.
In August 1953, before construction work had begun on the school, the Board voted (unanimously) to remove 4,000 cubic yards of “fill from the Love Canal to complete the top grading” at another school, on 93rd Street, whose construction was already well under way. This school, like the one on 99th Street nearby, is now closed down because of public concerns about the school children’s exposure to chemical waste residues.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:10 amA set of architect’s plans dated August 18, 1955, reveals that another 10,000 cubic yards of soil were to be removed from the top of the Canal in order to grade the surrounding area. Part of the area from which this soil was to be scooped out had been filled with Hooker’s wastes. The grading was executed as shown in these plans. Later in the year, the Buildings and Grounds Committee donated some of the property immediately surrounding the school to the city so that streets and sidewalks could be paved. (The school building had been completed and its doors opened to 500 students in February 1955.)
On June 25, 1956, the architect wrote to the contractor for the school’s playground, changing the location of the kindergarten play area “so as not to interfere with the apparent chemical deposit” and informing him that “this revision has been approved by Dr. Small, Superintendent of Schools. “In an October report on this contractor’s work, the architect reiterated that “these changes were discussed with school authorities” and had been made “because a chemical dump occurred at the originally located play area.” The architect further pointed out that “these chemical pits are continuously settling.”
The whole character of this correspondence between the architect and the Board and contractors is in the manner of a somnambulist executing his accustomed routines, as in a deep, quiet fog that is never interrupted by the sound of the 55-gallon drums clanking around in the pits. One would be led to believe that they had signed the Love Canal deed with their eyes closed and their ears shut. The superintendent of schools approved relocation of the play areas so as to avoid “chemical deposits” and “chemical pits” and never once took it upon himself to advise the architect that more was at stake here than “detriment to the concrete foundations” due to “chemical pits…continuously settling.” It is evident that the architect had never seen the deed. He and the contractor had to discover that this place had once been a chemical dump. The superintendent knew that it had been; he had been present at the drilling of test holes at the site; he had read the deed but evidently never imparted any wisdom therefrom to the architect or the contractor. He didn’t tell them, for example, about the danger of injury or death.
The Board was finally jarred awake in November 1957. The precipitating event was a proposal from two developers who owned land on another site that the Board was hungrily eyeing. The developers had suggested a trade whereby they would have gotten chunks of the Love Canal property in return for their properties plus some cash. The deal would have netted the Board $11,000, and Wesley Kester and the rest of the Buildings and Grounds Committee were strongly in favor of it. But Hooker got wind of the proposal and was just as strongly opposed.
Hooker sent its attorney, Arthur Chambers, to attend the meeting of the Board on November 7. As reported in the Niagara Gazette the next day, Chambers admonished the Board of Education that it had “a certain moral responsibility in the disposition of the land. “After reminding the Board that chemicals were buried under the surface, he explained that this “made the land unsuitable for construction in which basements, water lines, sewers and such underground facilities would be necessary.” He referred to “negotiations at the time the land was deeded to the board,” in which Hooker had urged that it be used only for surface constructions or parks. According to the Board minutes from that evening, Mr. Chambers conceded “that his company could not prevent the Board from selling the land or from doing anything they wanted to with it,” but he made clear Hooker’s “intent that this property be used for a school and for parking. He further stated that they feel the property should not be divided for the purpose of building homes and hoped that no one will be injured. “
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:12 amYour prescription appears to be just what the doctor ordered. But I’d add, take the same amount out on general principles, add incentives to come under budget and severely reduce conference, travel and entertainment budgets.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:14 amI apologize for the walls of text. In most cases of this sort the true story takes much longer to explain than the lie.
Love Canal was an example of the government negligently polluting despite knowing the risks and then covering up its role in it, and then activists blaming the private sector and calling for more government.
This is simply the fact, and the parallels with the topic of this thread are startling. How many more cases of this type might we find if the media went for the truth instead of a pre-crafted narrative.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:15 amLos Angeles drinks us dry first, before they ever turn an eye to you.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:16 amThe pre-crafted narrative won a Pulitzer:
Hooker was opposed to any construction through any part of the Canal, precisely because of such risks. And work on this sewer system was being done by the city of Niagara Falls at the same time as the warnings that such construction was “dangerous,” “injurious,” and not “safe ” were appearing in the local newspapers. But nobody made the connection; it is as though the printed word had not existed. The sleepwalkers kept bumping around in the night. Hooker was protesting into an abyss; no one was there who would hear and who would make connections between the real world and the printed warnings. Yet now Hooker is being excoriated.
This marked the first time in history that the Canal walls had been penetrated. Maps in the city engineer’s office show that there were no sewers into the Canal before this one. But another was soon to be built. This was a storm sewer, under Read Avenue. It was put in between May and September 1960 and penetrated only the west Canal wall, running from a catch basin sunk into the Canal, out to 97th Street. Again, the sewer-bed was gravel.
The drawings of these sewers are available for public inspection at the office of the city engineer in the town hall. One member of the public who, it seems, never cared to look at them—nor at the voluminous printed records and correspondence regarding Love Canal that are also available at the Board of Education—is Michael Brown, the author of the Pulitzer-prize-nominated book on the subject of waste dumping.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:18 amGabriel, Thank you for that information. Do you have a reference?
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:20 amBob, I was not reacting to JVW’s post, which is excellent, but to Fred Z’s suggestion that the EPA is a leftist conspiracy against allodial rights. And if I wrongly inferred what Fred Z meant, I don’t care.
Why should Patterico be the only one to get his balls busted by cranky commenters? What’s so special about you snowflakes? I’m giving you notice, as long as I’m around, this is not a safe space.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:21 amGabriel, I see the link @25 now.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:24 amnk, but you liked the Ghost Busters link, yes?
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:25 am“I’m giving you notice, as long as I’m around, this is not a safe space..”
Meh. That may work on the cloven-hoof crowd, but not too sure your threats will get traction around here.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:32 amI liked our version, that we PTA parents put on for the kids one Halloween, better. I can’t remember which one I played. Tall skinny guy with glasses? And our secretary was a lissome blonde.
I agree with JVW’s point if that’s what you mean. I don’t question the EPA’s fault in this incident.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:34 amhttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/13/not-tired-of-winning-yet/
Related information on the EPA’s considered judgement when it is presented to a real judge.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:55 amJVW, I didn’t miss the point. I even concede that you have a point – someone should be held accountable if it can be shown that the guilty party knowingly caused harm. But I disagree with that premise.
Besides, people on the right all too often want to bash the government without appreciating the good that they do. The EPA does probably go too far in some cases. If so, lets correct that. But using a rare example such as this to demonize the entire organization, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, is what I’m taking issue with.
I’ll give you this: the Veterans Admin. should probably be completely overhauled. If you want to go after a government entity, that one is a good candidate.
Tillman (a95660) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:55 am@Tillman: But using a rare example such as this to demonize the entire organization, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, is what I’m taking issue with.
We shouldn’t demonize a popular athlete who brought joy to millions for many years just because of that one time he murdered two people.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:00 am@Tillman: Sorry, this is the EPA’s baby. They did it, it was hundreds of millions in damage. They refuse to be acocuntable. Volkswagen did far less harm than this and they are on the hook for billions.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:01 am@Tillman: Sorry, this is the EPA’s baby. They did it, it was hundreds of millions in damage. They refuse to be accountable. Volkswagen did far less harm than this and they are on the hook for billions.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:01 amLos Angeles drinks us dry first, before they ever turn an eye to you.
It’s all LA’s water.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:24 pmIf so, lets correct that. But using a rare example such as this to demonize the entire organization, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, is what I’m taking issue with.”
Tell you what, Tillman, I’ll dial back the umbrage over government malfeasance (provided we start to see some accountability) if and when your side stops blaming capitalism every time some crooked (or incompetent) businessperson tries to game the system. But don’t lecture us on “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” if you guys are going to lap up all of the vacuous platitudes that emanate from the lips of Bernard Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
JVW (6e49ce) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:27 pmFair enough point JVW, I can respect that.
I think that both factions would benefit from resisting the temptation to see issues like this as simply black or white.
Tillman (a95660) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:48 pmAnother EPA disaster in Georgia.
http://watchdog.org/234655/ga-epa-spill/
I remember finding more incidents at the time of the spill, but now google only reports the Goldmine spill.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:42 pm==Where was the Army Corps of Engineers in all this, BTW?==
I’ll tell you where the Army Corps of Engineers was. They were busy with more important tasks like declaring my little residential community (which has never flooded) to be a flood hazard area thus making it more difficult to sell homes in an already bad real estate market and causing the bank of anyone who had a mortgage to require expensive flood insurance if they wished to keep the mortgage.
Next….
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:57 pmThe EPA doesn’t pay fines. Cutting the EPA budget for a couple of years won’t do anything. It’ll be just like the “government shutdown” where the workers stay home for a couple of weeks without pay, and then go back to work and they get the missed paychecks right back.
The only thing that would have any effect is to fire a bunch of them. Identify every single EPA employee that had any connection, no matter how small, to this spill and fire them immediately.
fred-2 (ce04f3) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:57 pm@16.By the way, I live in Colorado and I’m more upset that we have to buy our drinking water. In our area, an entire aquifer was poisoned. I don’t know if it was from a business or the military, but it was one or the other.
The solution is available by the six-pack or the case: Coors.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:44 pmI think it is more than fair for the people to expect the employees at the EPA to not foul the environment. It is also fair for the people to identify agencies who consistently engage in bureaucratic overreach and then dial those agencies back. In some cases the people might be better served by disbanding something like the EPA, then using another agency or agencies to do the job.
steveg (5508fb) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:59 pmBut it is awful hard to unring a bell, so lets not try.
The San Juan is kinda muddy yellow out west over in Utah by Mexican Hat, but this color in the Animas was special.
Durango is a beautiful little city. Used to stop there sometimes on my way over to the Gunnison area over the years.
steveg (5508fb) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:20 pmIn early 2000’s they built a nice community athletic/fitness center. Gym, swim, shower for $3. I did everyone a favor and showered once when I got there, and again before I left.
Has been ten years since last time there though… need to do the Zion, Bryce, Grand Canyon, Monument Valley, Grand Gulch and back down to Hovenweep and then out to Cortez to the Rockies route again soon before all the dirt gets paved over
The EPA’s functions used to be part of the department of interior. President Nixon created the EPA by executive order. I believe it was later approved by Congress. I don’t see why it couldn’t be abolished and its functions moved back into the department of interior.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:11 pmStrange thing. William T. Love’s original plan, which was blocked by act of Congress, is the system they use today, called the Robert Moses Niagra Power Plant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses_Niagara_Power_Plant
Congress must have changed their mind.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:15 pmPrivate businesses are afraid of the lawyers and the prosecutors, but not so much government agencies, and they aren’t afraid of getting fired for cause either.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 9:52 am@Gabriel Hanna Where are these quotations about what really happened with Love Canal and who was really negligent or unconcerned taken from? I don’t think you say.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:35 pm