Essay example – Water Pollution.
The river use to stream through the forest of the hardwoods.
The livestock waste was streamed into the Fork West making it extremely polluted making the vertebrates in the river to perish which in turn led to a decrease in fish population in the stream.
This animal waste also led to algal bloom which worsens the conditions of waters in this river which later leads to death of fish due to lack of oxygen.
The pesticides and insecticides used in the farms gets its way into the waters of river West Fork polluting its waters.
This made pollution more terrible to the marine life in the river at that point in time.
This destroyed the natural environment which was a catchment area for this river and a source of living to many downstream.
The development of ditches and trenches led to the destruction of water catchment areas which were formally of a quality nature.
This pollution led to degradation of the water of this stream and lives of the people who live downstream .The people down the stream use the river both for domestic use and other farming activities.
The water could therefore have negative effects on their health since it may lead to contamination of water and food.

Persistently high pesticide levels found in small streams.
A study commissioned by the Federal Office for the Environment and published today shows that the legal requirements specified for water quality are not met in any of the five Swiss streams investigated.
Wide variety of agents and high concentrations It had been suspected that small watercourses are heavily contaminated with plant protection products (PPPs), and this has now been confirmed.
In 80% of samples, the limit (0.1 µg/L) specified in the Waters Protection Ordinance was exceeded by at least one substance – for over 60 days in all five streams investigated, and for almost the entire six-month study period in the Weierbach (Basel-Landschaft) and Eschelisbach (Thurgau).
Concentrations as high as 40 µg/L were detected for individual substances.
Chronic and acute toxicity of mixtures Because the limit of 0.1 µg/L per individual substance specified in the Waters Protection Ordinance does not adequately reflect the actual risks for organisms – and 20 to 40 substances, on average, were detected in each sample – the analytical data were also compared with ecotoxicological water quality criteria.
The results leave little room for interpretation: in all cases, chronic water quality criteria were exceeded (sometimes many times over) for a period ranging from two weeks (Ticino) to as much as five-and-a-half months (Basel-Landschaft, Thurgau).
In four of the watercourses, concentrations exceeded the thresholds for acute toxicity to sensitive organisms, for periods of up to two months (Valais).
The lowest level of contamination was found at the monitoring site in the canton of Ticino, where the catchment area shows a lower intensity of agricultural use.
Action Plan under development to reduce risks of pesticides For Stephan Müller, Head of the Water Division at the FOEN, these findings confirm that agricultural PPPs – alongside micropollutants released from wastewater treatment plants – are currently the most important source of contaminants in Swiss surface waters.

Shellfish beds opened, stream advisories lifted as water quality improves.
Kitsap Public Health District has lifted health advisories for three streams in the county after water samples showed reduced levels of bacteria.
The state Department of Health also approved 57 acres of shellfish beds near Indianola for commercial harvest in a report published this week, a sign of improving environmental health in the area.
Failing septic systems, leaking sewage pipes, and pet and wildlife poop are common culprits.
Stream advisories lifted The health district lifted health advisories this year for Barrantes, Bear and Karcher creeks, three streams that previously had elevated levels of bacteria.
“All of them are fairly small streams, so any significant source of bacteria can make the concentration in the stream higher much more quickly,” Ultican said.
Sources of pollution were different in each stream.
Ultican said chemical analysis of water samples from Little Scandia suggests wildlife waste is the source of high bacteria levels in the stream.
The Department of Health report approving the Indianola shellfish beds cited the health district’s success identifying and correcting failing septic systems in the area.
Kiess said the state is expected to approve more than 600 acres of shellfish beds in Liberty Bay for harvest in the near future, based on improved water quality.

Drought has taken a toll on Maine’s wild brook trout.
That’s way better than stressing the wild populations.” State officials have not placed restrictions on fishing for wild brook trout this spring, but biologists say they would not hesitate to react should the situation worsen.
“I would say the impact, particularly in stream systems, was very large,” said Jim Pellerin, a regional fisheries biologist in southern Maine.
Once ponds open across the state, biologists and fishermen will keep a close eye on the status of wild brook trout.
“The wild fish population just crashed,” said Obrey, Maine’s brook trout specialist.
“There are ponds I know that have really small spring inlets.
I did observe trout spawning in the Kennebago over Columbus Day as usual, although the water level was much lower.” Steve Heinz, a director with the Sebago Chapter of fish conservation group Trout Unlimited, said he saw many wild brook trout streams in the foothills of the White Mountains dry up last summer when he was replacing culverts.
So the Sebago chapter works to replace culverts to help the wild fish move between different waters.
He said if prolonged dry periods become more common, fishermen should just stop fishing to help wild brook trout populations.
People are delusional to think catch-and-release works 100 percent of the time.

Legislation that could allow increased discharges of toxic chemicals into West Virginia’s rivers and streams won final approval from the state Senate Tuesday, giving business and industry lobbyists a major victory on a long-sought change in the way the state calculates water pollution permit limits.
Senators voted 20-13 in favor of House Bill 2506 and sent the measure to Gov.
DEP officials have previously used a more protective low-flow stream figure in calculating those permit limits.
Sen. Corey Palumbo, D-Kanawha, noted that the legislation makes West Virginia’s permit calculations less stringent than surrounding states.
“I don’t think our path to economic development is saying we allow more pollutants into our streams than other states.” While lawmakers heard testimony from DEP officials, industry lobbyists and a consultant working for the West Virginia Rivers Coalition on the issue, the legislative review of the bill brought out no clear answers about the extent to which pollution discharges could be increased or about long-term public health implications of the bill — or about exactly what new businesses and jobs such a change in environmental rules would bring to West Virginia.
Miller’s amendment was rejected on an 18-11 vote with five senators absent.
I am certain of it from the science I learned.” Never fully explained during legislative discussions on the bill, though, was why the DEP under the previous administration rejected EPA’s recommendation to use harmonic mean for both types of pollutants, keeping a low-flow measurement for non-carcinogens, as surrounding states also do.
Various industry groups have waged an on-and-off effort to change the state DEP to using harmonic mean since the early 1990s, when a proposal to do so was defeated after one of its chief opponents, the Affiliated Construction Trades Foundation, ran a public relations campaign that dubbed the measure the “Cancer Creek Bill.” Trump noted during Tuesday’s floor debate that after passage of harmonic mean, West Virginia will still continue to apply its drinking water standards, known as Category A, to all segments of all rivers and streams statewide, even when there is no public drinking water intake present.
“West Virginia provides as great or greater protection to its waters in terms of drinking water criteria than any of our surrounding states,” Trump said.
I like that our state says every stretch of every river and stream is going to meet drinking water criteria.” Voting against the final bill were Sens.

RHINEBECK, N.Y. >> The village has agreed to help develop an evaluation system to determine how much protection municipal water sources have from contamination in secondary creeks and streams. The Village Board endorsed the effort at its meeting Thursday. Dan Shapley, water quality program director for the environmental protection group Riverkeeper, said at the meeting that the village will be working with six other communities that draw water from the Hudson River. “There’s 100,000 people altogether,” Shapley said. “If it was a single city, it would be the sixth largest in the state. But we don’t think of the Hudson as a drinking water source.” Shapley noted that other water sources, such as New York City’s upstate reservoirs, have considerable protections with significant public notifications to warn against contributors to contamination. Advertisement “When you drive down the Taconic…

The House voted 63-37 to approve the legislation.
House Bill 2506 would change the type of stream flow measurements the state Department of Environmental Protection uses when it sets the amount of pollution that chemical plants, factories and other industrial facilities can routinely discharge into the state’s waterways.
Under the bill, being pushed by the West Virginia Manufacturers Association, DEP would switch from using a low-flow figure for streams to an average-flow figure, called “harmonic mean.” The change would not increase the state’s actual in-stream pollution limits, but would increase the discharges that chemical plants and other industrial sites are allowed under DEP-approved permits.
“If I believed it was going to harm the water quality of the state of West Virginia, I would be against it.
“So, the overall water quality of the body of water doesn’t change with this bill.” It’s correct that the bill doesn’t specifically change the state’s numeric water quality limits for in-stream pollution.
But by changing the flow measurements used for setting the pollution any particular facility can discharge, the legislation would increase the amount of pollution those facilities can discharge, critics of the bill noted.
“The water standards are not changed,” Lane said.
Neither DEP nor lawmakers have offered any detailed analysis of exactly how the bill would increase pollution allowed in the state’s rivers and streams, or how such increase might affect public health.
I believe we’re better than that.” Another opponent of the bill, Delegate Barbara Fleischauer, D-Monongalia, strongly disputed suggestions from some supporters that because the bill regulates routine pollution discharges and not one-time leaks like the one in January 2014 at Freedom Industries, the Kanawha Valley water crisis has nothing to do with the bill.
Fleischauer said the water crisis should have shown lawmakers why tough protections for drinking water sources are important.