3 ms·

If its really that localized, why doesn't the state of Washington just ban the chemical? Not unprecidented for a state to have its own environmental regs that a

by throwaway201103 6y ago

If its really that localized, why doesn't the state of Washington just ban the chemical? Not unprecidented for a state to have its own environmental regs that are stricter than national regs. And since there are no salmon migrating up rivers in Kentucky, it should be less of a concern there and you don't need to spend effort/political favors getting the support from the Kentucky delegation in congress. Sure it would not be perfect, because you would still have out-of-state vehicles using the roads, but it would be an improvement that could probably get done a lot faster and it might be enough.

grawprog 6y ago
>why doesn't the state of Washington just ban the chemical? Is it just salmon affected by this chemical? It looks like Kentucky has both cutthroat and rainbow trout. Both of which are actually species of salmon in the genus Oncorhynchus, which are true salmon. Would they be affected by the chemical? How about other species of fish? That's the thing about this kind of stuff, it's not necessarily localized. There's a lot we don't know about ecosystems and the long term effects of chemicals like this. Chances are though, if it affects one area in such a negative way, it'll have other negative effects.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  Well start with what we know. We have a problem in the Puget Sound area. I'm not hearing anything about trout in Kentucky. A lot of environmnental regulation got its start with regulation in California that spread from there. It's easier to get something passed locally than to get national support from day one.
  - munificent 6y ago
    > I'm not hearing anything about trout in Kentucky. That probably says more about environment research funding in Kentucky than it does their fish. Washington is one of the most pro-science states in the US, the Puget Sound area has one of the greatest concentration of environmentally focused people, and salmon are historically deeply ingrained in Washington culture. If it took all of that to garner enough resources to discover this problem, imagine all of the other environmental disasters out there that we're simply oblivious to.
- mattgrice 6y ago
  This research was motivated by the runoff effect being especially acute in coho salmon. It probably affects other species, too. Now that we know the chemical responsible it will be easier to test that.

grawprog 6y ago

>why doesn't the state of Washington just ban the chemical? Is it just salmon affected by this chemical? It looks like Kentucky has both cutthroat and rainbow trout. Both of which are actually species of salmon in the genus Oncorhynchus, which are true salmon. Would they be affected by the chemical? How about other species of fish? That's the thing about this kind of stuff, it's not necessarily localized. There's a lot we don't know about ecosystems and the long term effects of chemicals like this. Chances are though, if it affects one area in such a negative way, it'll have other negative effects.

throwaway201103 6y ago
Well start with what we know. We have a problem in the Puget Sound area. I'm not hearing anything about trout in Kentucky. A lot of environmnental regulation got its start with regulation in California that spread from there. It's easier to get something passed locally than to get national support from day one.
- munificent 6y ago
  > I'm not hearing anything about trout in Kentucky. That probably says more about environment research funding in Kentucky than it does their fish. Washington is one of the most pro-science states in the US, the Puget Sound area has one of the greatest concentration of environmentally focused people, and salmon are historically deeply ingrained in Washington culture. If it took all of that to garner enough resources to discover this problem, imagine all of the other environmental disasters out there that we're simply oblivious to.
mattgrice 6y ago
This research was motivated by the runoff effect being especially acute in coho salmon. It probably affects other species, too. Now that we know the chemical responsible it will be easier to test that.