Animas River May Remain Toxic for Decades After EPA Spill

animas riverBy Joshua Krause

Ever since the EPA accidentally dumped 3 million gallons of toxic mine water into the Animas River, Colorado authorities have been keen on reopening the river for public use as soon as possible. The river is a significant source of tourist income in the region, and they don’t want the toxic spill to put a damper on their summer.

Governor John Hickenlooper is one of those authorities, and he’s determined to prove that everything is back to normal. So on Tuesday, after being given the challenge by the Durango Herald, he decided to take a big gulp of river water for the cameras. After 24 hours, he reported that he was still in perfect health.

However, that hardly proves that the river is safe, at least in the long term. Granted, the EPA has tested the water and found that its toxicity has returned to pre-spill levels, but all of this is based on only a few days of water testing, which hardly enough time to draw a proper conclusion. Even the EPA admitted that during a recent public meeting between themselves and the Governor.

Speaking in Durango, Hickenlooper, a Democrat, said a preliminary analysis of water samples taken Friday from Cement Creek – after a plume of mustard-yellow mining wastewater crawled down the river – shows that the water has largely returned to pre-event levels. Concentrations of heavy metals and pH had returned to within normal ranges, confirmed Dr. Larry Wolk, executive director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

But an official with the EPA asked Hickenlooper to stop making comments about the returning health of the river.

“It doesn’t show where we are at right now,” Shaun McGrath, Region 8 administrator for the EPA, told Hickenlooper, as officials huddled on the grass at Rotary Park. “You have to have a couple of days of data to show that you’re actually back to baseline conditions, and we’re not there yet.”

“That’s nonsense,” Hickenlooper responded, pointing out that businesses that rely on the river to drive operations are closed.

Just one day later, the EPA went so far as to call the water safe for consumption in Durango and La Plata County. Make of that of what you will. It’s probably true that this stretch of the river is now relatively safe, but that’s only temporary. In all likelihood, the toxicity of the whole Animas River will haunt the region for decades.

Ellen Wohl, a geoscience professor at Colorado State University told Business Insider she thinks the governor’s push to reopen the river doesn’t necessarily reflect the river’s health, but rather, pressure to get boating and other recreational activities going again on the river.

Even if the pH and heavy metal levels have returned to normal for now, she said, it doesn’t mean they won’t be a problem in the next few decades. The metals will stick around for a while, clinging to the silt and clay at the bottom of the river.

“There’s the potential every time we have a flood for quite a while now that this material could be eroded, and you could have spikes of heavy metal [levels],” Wohl said.

How much do you want to bet that this will all blow over after a few weeks, and for the next 10 or 20 years the authorities will ignore these “heavy metal spikes?” The state authorities won’t want to alarm residents and tourists, while the EPA will be too busy enjoying their SuperFund money to care. Honestly, you shouldn’t expect anything less when politics, bureaucracy, and money collide with the environment.

Image Credit

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

9 Comments on "Animas River May Remain Toxic for Decades After EPA Spill"

  1. Could EPA have intentionally created this spill to further the UN Agenda 21 Goals of moving people out of rural areas into cities?

    • wisdom of the knowing | August 14, 2015 at 10:05 pm | Reply

      Good question. The logic fits the agenda of the agenda 21.
      the health affects will show up soon enough.

      • William Burke | August 16, 2015 at 7:58 pm | Reply

        Sure. Some of that water ends up in Southern California/LA Basin area, where it is a substantial part of their water supply.

    • William Burke | August 16, 2015 at 7:55 pm | Reply

      It’s not necessarily related to Agenda 21, but it certainly could be. At the least, it’s a payback and pay-forward to the agency’s many Corporate Criminal associates.

  2. Bit of thought here, may be counter to what many of us deem common logic. Bear with me though.

    As a general rule in politics and illicit affairs we follow the money. Who profits?

    Consider that a minute when suggesting the STATE, now a corporation here in America, would want more people in cities. If more people, presumably unemployed due to dislocation, move to the cities it means STATE has to pick up the bills. STATE pays unemployment, possibly health care, daycare, S.N.A.P for these now dependent people.

    How is it STATE as a corporation would profit by having to pay out to cover costs of these dependents?

    Not saying a means for STATE to profit does not exist in this swindle, if it is such. Not saying it is a swindle, or that STATE would exactly be the one to profit if any profit was realized. I am saying there are a few basic questions at hand, for me at least, what merit and warrant other questions.

    Or, it may be STATE is culling people to the cities all the better for some form of genocide?

    Well, human labor provides value to any form of money. Money itself is merely a useless symbolic tool. It is the human labor, creativity, ingenuity that create value and ergo power. If genocide is the order it would seem STATE, or whatever MASTER it acts as middleman for would lose a great deal of value which is by extension profit.

    To me it seems illogical that STATE would risk losing profit, as profit is sacred for corporations. Letting dependents siphon off profit, or killing dependents, either way causes loss of profit.

    I’m not a lawyer or economist, banker, doctor. I am a mere humble rural dwelling man that sees things differently at times. You can take or leave my views as you desire. Only offering speculative opinion as seems commonplace nowadays.

  3. gozounlimited | August 15, 2015 at 1:12 pm | Reply

    Spelled…… G-E-N-O-C-I-D-E

  4. William Burke | August 16, 2015 at 7:52 pm | Reply

    Governor “Chickenpooper”, as he is widely know in the west, is a liar and a criminal. I immediately intuited (I have lots of experience with such liars) that the EPA did this on purpose, in order to declare a multizillion dollar “Superfund” site that so profits the EPA’s many “clean-up” crony capitalist fellow travelers.

    Necks need to snap at the end of nooses over this deliberately-caused atrocity. IN PUBLIC and ON TV,

  5. William Burke | August 16, 2015 at 7:57 pm | Reply

    What does “the human domain” mean, exactly? Dissecting it, it means all the places that humans do what humans do. i.e., the world, meaning “becoming masters of the planet”.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.