Who need enemies when you have big oil, or terrorist, or global warming. Public properties set aside for National Parks should have never been cleared for oil drilling in the first place. Where else can the children of today and our future see nature in its most magnificent raw form? We are rapidly poisoning the water hole and everything connected to it. Every ecosystem is fragile, but modern man has found a way to break mother nature down.
The landscape, once filled with hills, wildflowers, green lush grass with Bison in the background is disrupted by steel machinery, loud equiptment and the foul stench of chemicals in the air . Oil and gas wells, once illegal upon public land until deregulations were implimented during the Bush Cheney administrations,cover the entire countryside.
A further bothersome fact, they are drilling in a seismically unstable region surrounding the "super" volcano, which is showing signs of irritation. Not forgetting the park serves as a wildlife refuge that protects endangered species like the American wolf and Bison, whose numbers are in decline.
.
The EPA has given a deadline set for early September, but Exxon has stated "no further employees are to be hired for the cleanup" and "the Sept. Date is not a firm timeline". Yet looking at the ecological impact this disaster will have upon life within the polluted region,considering our ever growing unemployment, would it not be better on the enviroment to get the oil up as quickly as possible by hiring some of the unemployed versus saving a few blades of grass, sand and corporate monies, which are oil soaked and doomed if this is not fixed? I'm sure there are thousands of hard working Americans who would jump at a job opportunity regardless if temporary or not.
BP already destroyed our Gulf, the sealife, the sealife to come, and precious families who no longer have a way to make a living. It will be years, if not decades before shrimp, oysters, and crab populations return if at all. Futhermore, many have become ill, possibly from emulsions that were supposed to lower the oil to the ocean floor,(not that this would help either) but instead created a barrier warming Gulf waters and preventing evaporation.
Exxon officials have stated (we) "want to preserve the fragile banks of the river". Wouldn't it have better to have thought of that before placing an oil pipeline under the Yellowstone river? Or at least taken steps to have monitered it more closely following the recent rains?
The longer the oil covers the waters the further it flows until mixing with other rivers and streams. Its harmful affects increase more and more, upon the lush river bottom lands, the fish which swim in it and killing the animals who drink it. And of course the poor birds who are rendered unable to coninue their southern migration.
With Yellowstone's winter season quickly approaching, arriving as early as the first of September, time is growing short. If the river begins to ice or the oil saturated land becomes snow covered, the already tedious task at hand, will only become more difficult, if not impossible.
http://m.trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_f12053d7-c046-542f-918d-8d13c51da3ac.html
The landscape, once filled with hills, wildflowers, green lush grass with Bison in the background is disrupted by steel machinery, loud equiptment and the foul stench of chemicals in the air . Oil and gas wells, once illegal upon public land until deregulations were implimented during the Bush Cheney administrations,cover the entire countryside.
A further bothersome fact, they are drilling in a seismically unstable region surrounding the "super" volcano, which is showing signs of irritation. Not forgetting the park serves as a wildlife refuge that protects endangered species like the American wolf and Bison, whose numbers are in decline.
.
The EPA has given a deadline set for early September, but Exxon has stated "no further employees are to be hired for the cleanup" and "the Sept. Date is not a firm timeline". Yet looking at the ecological impact this disaster will have upon life within the polluted region,considering our ever growing unemployment, would it not be better on the enviroment to get the oil up as quickly as possible by hiring some of the unemployed versus saving a few blades of grass, sand and corporate monies, which are oil soaked and doomed if this is not fixed? I'm sure there are thousands of hard working Americans who would jump at a job opportunity regardless if temporary or not.
BP already destroyed our Gulf, the sealife, the sealife to come, and precious families who no longer have a way to make a living. It will be years, if not decades before shrimp, oysters, and crab populations return if at all. Futhermore, many have become ill, possibly from emulsions that were supposed to lower the oil to the ocean floor,(not that this would help either) but instead created a barrier warming Gulf waters and preventing evaporation.
Exxon officials have stated (we) "want to preserve the fragile banks of the river". Wouldn't it have better to have thought of that before placing an oil pipeline under the Yellowstone river? Or at least taken steps to have monitered it more closely following the recent rains?
The longer the oil covers the waters the further it flows until mixing with other rivers and streams. Its harmful affects increase more and more, upon the lush river bottom lands, the fish which swim in it and killing the animals who drink it. And of course the poor birds who are rendered unable to coninue their southern migration.
With Yellowstone's winter season quickly approaching, arriving as early as the first of September, time is growing short. If the river begins to ice or the oil saturated land becomes snow covered, the already tedious task at hand, will only become more difficult, if not impossible.
http://m.trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_f12053d7-c046-542f-918d-8d13c51da3ac.html
No comments:
Post a Comment