This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

(02-28-2017 04:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

And we're not the Soviet Union trying to irrigate desert to make it farm land as with the Aral.

We're talking something very specific here, primarily fertilizer runoff and algae blooms, invasive species, and the role of the EPA. You have anything relevant to those topics to add?

No one is suggesting draining the Great Lakes... *rolls eyes*

(02-28-2017 12:27 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 07:12 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  How does Mach sleep at night when everything is awful, urgent and a second hand tick away from going over the ledge for good?

Are you seriously not aware of the importance of the Great Lakes?

So why did the Obama era EPA worry more about stock ponds and dry gullies than the very important Great Lakes?

(02-28-2017 04:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

And we're not the Soviet Union trying to irrigate desert to make it farm land as with the Aral.

We're talking something very specific here, primarily fertilizer runoff and algae blooms, invasive species, and the role of the EPA. You have anything relevant to those topics to add?

No one is suggesting draining the Great Lakes... *rolls eyes*

most of the damage to that lake came after the USSR fell. and I doubt 90% lake reduction was their endgame

also: it is the fertilizer discharge that makes the aral sea desert so toxic. living on the dead lakebed is worse for your health than living in chernobyl.

Perhaps instead of trying to prove global warming, air quality, water quality, etc, etc, etc we would be better served questioning HOW exactly the EPA was helping. Do we really need 15,000 + EPA employees to achieve the goal of clean water? We already have the same types of agencies in every state as far as I know.

(02-27-2017 08:10 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 08:06 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana are under Republican leadership. Republican state EPA's. Nuff said. This problem will only get incrementally worse under regulation cutting Trump and I'll make damn sure to remind everybody of that fact in 18.

The states can't supersede the Feds on environmental matters so nice try.


If this is so important why wasn't it dealt with by the EPA when it was in bed with radical environmental groups?

BINGO! WE HAVE A WINNER LADIES AND GERMS.

Let me get this straight. Before Trump we had an EPA and yet this thing happened. So in retrospect what good has it done. Not a dang thing and now the scientists are worried. Wowsers.

(02-28-2017 04:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

And we're not the Soviet Union trying to irrigate desert to make it farm land as with the Aral.

We're talking something very specific here, primarily fertilizer runoff and algae blooms, invasive species, and the role of the EPA. You have anything relevant to those topics to add?

No one is suggesting draining the Great Lakes... *rolls eyes*

most of the damage to that lake came after the USSR fell. and I doubt 90% lake reduction was their endgame

also: it is the fertilizer discharge that makes the aral sea desert so toxic. living on the dead lakebed is worse for your health than living in chernobyl.

Yea, from the diversion the Soviets started in the 1960's.

So nothing to add to the topic.

Got it.

(02-27-2017 06:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.greatlakesnow.org/2017/02/gre...lake-erie/

In my lifetime I have seen this Lake recover but the last 5 years it's taken a significant hit. The farm bill in 08 was the leading cause. Spreadsheet farmers doing all they can to up yield. You can see the Maumee River on that map. The state of Indiana was invited to a phosphorous conference just to talk about best practices. They declined. This is why we need the EPA.

Scientists don't worry

(02-28-2017 05:01 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Perhaps instead of trying to prove global warming, air quality, water quality, etc, etc, etc we would be better served questioning HOW exactly the EPA was helping. Do we really need 15,000 + EPA employees to achieve the goal of clean water? We already have the same types of agencies in every state as far as I know.

Exactly. Maybe keep a handful around for oversight of the 50 Agencies, fire all the mostly useless DC bureaucrat types and return that salary $$$'s to the States for "clean air" funding. That'd go a looooooong way in the right hands.

Having something like the EPA as this giant behemoth sitting in Washington dictating to farmers in Idaho makes zero sense. Send it home.

(02-28-2017 05:19 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

And we're not the Soviet Union trying to irrigate desert to make it farm land as with the Aral.

We're talking something very specific here, primarily fertilizer runoff and algae blooms, invasive species, and the role of the EPA. You have anything relevant to those topics to add?

No one is suggesting draining the Great Lakes... *rolls eyes*

most of the damage to that lake came after the USSR fell. and I doubt 90% lake reduction was their endgame

also: it is the fertilizer discharge that makes the aral sea desert so toxic. living on the dead lakebed is worse for your health than living in chernobyl.

Yea, from the diversion the Soviets started in the 1960's.

So nothing to add to the topic.

Got it.

most =/= all genius.

after the soviets fell they should have reversed their policies. but they continued.

and none of this defeats the point. don't f*** around with this stuff. period.

(02-28-2017 05:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 05:19 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 04:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  This is Lake Urmia: Once the sixth largest saltwater lake in the world and the largest lake in the middle east:





This is the Aral Sea Once the 4th largest lake in the world:



Both lakes lost 90% of their water

This is lake chad which lost 95%



don't f*** with this stuff. the results are catastrophic.

And we're not the Soviet Union trying to irrigate desert to make it farm land as with the Aral.

We're talking something very specific here, primarily fertilizer runoff and algae blooms, invasive species, and the role of the EPA. You have anything relevant to those topics to add?

No one is suggesting draining the Great Lakes... *rolls eyes*

most of the damage to that lake came after the USSR fell. and I doubt 90% lake reduction was their endgame

also: it is the fertilizer discharge that makes the aral sea desert so toxic. living on the dead lakebed is worse for your health than living in chernobyl.

Yea, from the diversion the Soviets started in the 1960's.

So nothing to add to the topic.

Got it.

most =/= all genius.

after the soviets fell they should have reversed their policies. but they continued.

and none of this defeats the point. don't f*** around with this stuff. period.

What "stuff", genius?

Are you really this thick, or just trolling again?

We aren't talking about damming the Urmia, or draining the Aral, or anything even remotely like this garbage you're "adding" to the thread.

The adults are actually having a pretty decent conversation about the PROBLEM that no one disputes is occurring and the best way(s) to possibly address said problems and by whom.

Your saying f$%^ around with this stuff sounds almost like we shouldn't be f$%^ing around with ways to limit non-point pollution sources, limiting runoff from the farms and golf courses or looking for ways to eliminate the introduction of invasive non-native species like the zebra mussel that harm the natives. We shouldn't discuss that stuff?

Why don't you just sit this one out. It's actually a relatively decent conversation, something, again, you know little about.

(02-27-2017 08:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is where you guys lose me. How frisked up in the mind do you have to be to not want clean air and water?

They only care if their own back yard has clean air and water. Everyone one else can go F themselves as far as they care.

He talks he wants clean water than wants to get rid of this ornery mine regulations. All these Repugnants clap. Dipshyts he's talking about polluting your water. They can't see that?

(02-27-2017 06:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.greatlakesnow.org/2017/02/gre...lake-erie/

In my lifetime I have seen this Lake recover but the last 5 years it's taken a significant hit. The farm bill in 08 was the leading cause. Spreadsheet farmers doing all they can to up yield. You can see the Maumee River on that map. The state of Indiana was invited to a phosphorous conference just to talk about best practices. They declined. This is why we need the EPA.

Mach if the EPA was efficient, this thread wouldn't had been started. This issue didn't magically occur on January 20th.

As someone who's worked an environmental remedial site, let me tell you the EPA is nothing but an agency of people not doing their job and being paid.

If anything the EPA needs to be stripped down, scrapped, and a better environmental group dedicated to preserving our environment needs to be established. But the current edition of the EPA prior to Jan 20 is not it. I'm not sure the next version will be either.

(02-28-2017 09:38 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 08:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is where you guys lose me. How frisked up in the mind do you have to be to not want clean air and water?

They only care if their own back yard has clean air and water. Everyone one else can go F themselves as far as they care.

You guys are incapable of an honest discussion. Even on something many of us may not only know about, but genuinely care about. For lots of reasons.

Good on you. N/M

(02-28-2017 10:49 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  He talks he wants clean water than wants to get rid of this ornery mine regulations. All these Repugnants clap. Dipshyts he's talking about polluting your water. They can't see that?

You guys are incapable of an honest discussion. Even on something many of us may not only know about, but genuinely care about. For lots of reasons.

Good on you. N/M

(02-27-2017 06:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.greatlakesnow.org/2017/02/gre...lake-erie/
In my lifetime I have seen this Lake recover but the last 5 years it's taken a significant hit. The farm bill in 08 was the leading cause. Spreadsheet farmers doing all they can to up yield. You can see the Maumee River on that map. The state of Indiana was invited to a phosphorous conference just to talk about best practices. They declined. This is why we need the EPA.

Mach, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that happen with the EPA in place?

If the EPA were the way to prevent it, it wouldn't have happened. That is the problem with the EPA. It is a bureaucracy that has lost its way in its pursuit of ever greater power.

No Owl. they don't have the regulatory functions they need. I happen to know a lot in this area. Here's how it went down. The EPA can not regulate fertilizers by state law. It's in the Dept. of Agriculture and it's set up so they have ZERO regulatory abilities. In the early 90's programs were set up to pay farmers for fallow land next to waterways. Farmers were actually cut a check if they didn't farm land next to a stream. These riparian zones were excellent for the health of the Lake. The vast majority of run off fertilizers were soaked up by plants in these zones. However, with the 09 farm bill, all of this changed. Ethanol was given huge subsidies. Farmers were given a huge incentive with crop insurances. They would always get the average of their best three years of yield no matter what. So you have a ton of land being put back into farming. It paid to put as much fertilizer on the land as you can to up yield. There is no regulatory functioning govt. body. You can tie the phosphorous levels in Lake Erie directly to the 09 farm bill.

(03-01-2017 11:02 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  No Owl. they don't have the regulatory functions they need. I happen to know a lot in this area. Here's how it went down. The EPA can not regulate fertilizers by state law. It's in the Dept. of Agriculture and it's set up so they have ZERO regulatory abilities. In the early 90's programs were set up to pay farmers for fallow land next to waterways. Farmers were actually cut a check if they didn't farm land next to a stream. These riparian zones were excellent for the health of the Lake. The vast majority of run off fertilizers were soaked up by plants in these zones. However, with the 09 farm bill, all of this changed. Ethanol was given huge subsidies. Farmers were given a huge incentive with crop insurances. They would always get the average of their best three years of yield no matter what. So you have a ton of land being put back into farming. It paid to put as much fertilizer on the land as you can to up yield. There is no regulatory functioning govt. body. You can tie the phosphorous levels in Lake Erie directly to the 09 farm bill.

2009, eh? What president signed it?

(03-02-2017 05:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-01-2017 11:02 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  No Owl. they don't have the regulatory functions they need. I happen to know a lot in this area. Here's how it went down. The EPA can not regulate fertilizers by state law. It's in the Dept. of Agriculture and it's set up so they have ZERO regulatory abilities. In the early 90's programs were set up to pay farmers for fallow land next to waterways. Farmers were actually cut a check if they didn't farm land next to a stream. These riparian zones were excellent for the health of the Lake. The vast majority of run off fertilizers were soaked up by plants in these zones. However, with the 09 farm bill, all of this changed. Ethanol was given huge subsidies. Farmers were given a huge incentive with crop insurances. They would always get the average of their best three years of yield no matter what. So you have a ton of land being put back into farming. It paid to put as much fertilizer on the land as you can to up yield. There is no regulatory functioning govt. body. You can tie the phosphorous levels in Lake Erie directly to the 09 farm bill.

2009, eh? What president signed it?

Who ran the House that would write and introduce the bill? Who ran the Senate that would sign on as well?

Mach? Were you voicing your opposition then?