Strip mining & water quality.

Aaron wrote:I understand if you don't have the answer for the reclaimed mine sites but if you're going to claim that MTR is making intermittent streams out of former year round streams, then you should have the numbers to back those claims up.

ziggy wrote:Total Perennial (year-round) Stream Under Valley Fill Footprint in Feet
WVA (1985-1999) 37,489 (7.1 m)

From Table III.K.5-1, Page 47, here: http://wvgazette.com/static/series/mining/reports/EIS/III.K.pdf

From Page 50 of the same report:

"Figure III.K.5-5 shows that, from 1985 through 1999, the average segment of intermittent and perennial streams impacted under the valley fill footprint has generally increased during the period from a low of 686 feet in 1987 to a high of 4,594 feet in 1998. Five hundred and fifty-five (59 percent) of the 945 valley fills approved during the period impact either intermittent or perennial streams. The figure also suggests that while the number of valley fills impacting streams has varied greatly during the period, the actual segment of intermittent and perennial streams impacted under the valley fill footprint has generally increased.

The total intermittent and perennial stream impacts in West Virginia is 945,069 feet, or 179.0 miles. The yearly average of stream impacts under the valley fill footprint is 63,005 feet, or 11.9 miles."---------------------------------

And those figures are just for the stream segments totally buried under valley fills. Again, Total Perennial (year-round) Stream Under Valley Fill Footprint in Feet WVA (1985-1999) 37,489 (7.1 m)

Ziggy, what you posted did not address or answer Aaron's question.

And if I understand it correctly, "valley fill footprint" means nothing more than "linear feet of valley fill".

Thus, it appears you just cited some meaningless piffle datum on ...... the comparison of yearly linear feet of new "valley fill" in respect to whether it occurred on an "intermittent or a perennial stream".

But now Ziggy, I'm curious as to how they determine what sections (portions) of said "valley fills" impact the two different stream types.

I mean like every stream in West Virginia orignates as an intermittent stream (unless its origin is a spring and/or artesian source) ....... and these only become perennial streams at quite some distance from the farthest, highest point of their "drainage area".

And Zig, if it is a perennial stream whose source is artesian, it doesn't matter if the ground is barren or lush with flora ......because the water is coming from 100+- miles away.

And ps, Zig, ..... another question for you.

If, ..... "Five hundred and fifty-five (59 percent) of the 945 valley fills approved during the period impact either intermittent or perennial streams", ....... then what kind of streams did the remaining 41% of valley fills impact?

.

Sam's right Frank. You didn't answer my question. If you guys are claiming what you stated, shouldn't you have te resources to back it up?

Aaron wrote:Sam's right Frank. You didn't answer my question. If you guys are claiming what you stated, shouldn't you have te resources to back it up?

Aaron, they didn't claim anything, ....... they "implied" gawd awful terrible things ..... and leave it up to the public's imagination to "create" facts that they honestly believe for themselves.

No for iinstance, take Ziggy's comment, to wit:

the stream segments totally buried under valley fills.

Stream segment ........ totally buried, ............ GIMME A BREAK.

There ain't no way in hell ya can ...... bury a stream, or a part of a stream or a segment of a stream ........ unless ya put in a big assed culvert and cover it over with rocks and/or dirt.

Burying a stream via a valley fill ...... is akin to getting rid of a hole in the ground by digging it out, ..... or getting rid of a mountain by covering it over with dirt.

And anyone who attempts to "bury a segment" of a stream ...... will only succeed in building a dam.

So yes, I actually believe, ....... that Ziggy actually believes ...... that those MTR'ers are actually killing those streams and burying them alive.



.

And anyone who attempts to "bury a segment" of a stream ...... will only succeed in building a dam.

Unless it is the top segment.

I know valley fills mess up the insect life for miles downstream.

The fish get pretty hungry.

TerryRC wrote:And anyone who attempts to "bury a segment" of a stream ...... will only succeed in building a dam.

Unless it is the top segment.

HORSEFEATHERS ....

A stream, brook, beck, burn or creek, is a body of water with a detectable current, confined within a bed and banks. Stream is also an umbrella term used in the scientific community for all flowing natural waters, regardless of size. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream

You will just create a pond or lake up-grade from that top segment of "flowing natural waters"

TerryRC wrote:I know valley fills mess up the insect life for miles downstream.

The fish get pretty hungry.

"YES", and so do devastating floods, ...... reguardless of whether there are any valley fills in the area. To wit:

My valley - South Branch Valley, West Virginia

But on November 5, 1985, my valley was changed almost irrevocably. Fueled by a 10-inch rain far up the hollows, the flood came with little warning. Confined i narrow valleys, the waters raged with such force that they twisted rails and scoured farmland until mostly rocks remained. Forty-seven people died along wit thousands of animals. More than 1,500 homes and 181 businesses were gone, and 4 bridges were destroyed in 29 counties.

The 1985 torrent broke all records and left its mark indelibly imprinted on the South Branch Valley.

High waters swept the streams clean of shade-giving trees, filled pools with silt, and eliminated channels where trout lurked in hot weather. Destruction wa so complete on the North Fork that trout stocking was stopped and fishermen ignored this once-lovely river.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1016/is_n9-10_v100/ai_16123383/pg_3

And TRC, down in the southern coal fields of MTR'ing, ....... other than maybe a few minnows and creek chubs, ....... just what species of fish are there there in those small streams .... that "get pretty hungry"?

Care to elaborate on that?

.

Zigster, if there is not enough rainwater to keep those streams flowing ..... ALL YEAR ROUND, ......... the Mayfly larvae/eggs WILL NOT survive from one year to the next.

Should I bother to explain a little about mayfly ecology and how they deal with ephemeral streams (of course the MTR people fill in first and second order streams, also) or would it be a waste of my time?

"YES", and so do devastating floods, ...... reguardless of whether there are any valley fills in the area. To wit:

So, because it happens occasionally by meteoroligical events combined (likely) with poor land management, we should let the coal companies do it willy-nilly?

Make some sense, man!

And TRC, down in the southern coal fields of MTR'ing, ....... other than maybe a few minnows and creek chubs, ....... just what species of fish are there there in those small streams .... that "get pretty hungry"?

Care to elaborate on that?

Perhaps I will. I'm just trying to decide if it is worth the effort.

In the southern coal fields, not too much, I'm afraid.

That isn't the case with the rest of the state.

TerryRC wrote:Zigster, if there is not enough rainwater to keep those streams flowing ..... ALL YEAR ROUND, ......... the Mayfly larvae/eggs WILL NOT survive from one year to the next.

Should I bother to explain a little about mayfly ecology and how they deal with ephemeral streams (of course the MTR people fill in first and second order streams, also) or would it be a waste of my time?

"YES", and so do devastating floods, ...... reguardless of whether there are any valley fills in the area. To wit:

So, because it happens occasionally by meteoroligical events combined (likely) with poor land management, we should let the coal companies do it willy-nilly?

Make some sense, man!

And TRC, down in the southern coal fields of MTR'ing, ....... other than maybe a few minnows and creek chubs, ....... just what species of fish are there there in those small streams .... that "get pretty hungry"?

Care to elaborate on that?

Perhaps I will. I'm just trying to decide if it is worth the effort.

In the southern coal fields, not too much, I'm afraid.

That isn't the case with the rest of the state.

Now that sure was an enlightening post.

And there in you were telling me to ........ "Make some sense, man!"



.

TerryRC wrote:Perhaps I will. I'm just trying to decide if it is worth the effort.

In the southern coal fields, not too much, I'm afraid.

That isn't the case with the rest of the state.

Considering that the bulk of the MTR sites are in southern WV, where is it affecting the fishies?

Aaron wrote:Sam's right Frank. You didn't answer my question. If you guys are claiming what you stated, shouldn't you have te resources to back it up?

Yes. And I must concede that I do not have the resources to back it up.

The example I cited at Cool Spring Branch of Tuppers Creek in the 1950s - 1960s was not a valley fill type of strip mining operation. It was the then more predominate surface mining method of ripping open the side of the mountain, taking out the coal that was exposed, then "punch nining" with augers to get to coal further back into the mountain. There was no pretense of reclamation- not even revegetation with grass- and a 75 foot or so highwall was left after the operation was abandoned.

And so I retract my assertion of perennial streams becoming intermittent streams below valley fills. That still may sometimes be so- but I am unable to substantiate it just now.

I'm not questioning that MTR does harm to waterways. I question the ability of waterways to rejuvenate themselves over time if it does happen and the severity of it happening.

I base this on the Cuyahoga River catching on fire numerous times from the 1860's including this one in in 1969...



...vs. today when fishing has once again returned to the river even though it is still used as a major transportation thoroughfare.



The fire in the first picture is being fought off the same bridge the barge in the second is traveling under.

Aaron wrote:

TerryRC wrote:Perhaps I will. I'm just trying to decide if it is worth the effort.

In the southern coal fields, not too much, I'm afraid.

That isn't the case with the rest of the state.

Considering that the bulk of the MTR sites are in southern WV, where is it affecting the fishies?

Aaron, that is why one has to "pay close attention" when reading such reports and news articles ...... because NO WHERE did it state any fishies were being affected. It merilly stated piffling facts of no consequence, to wit:

Mayflies are short-lived aquatic insects that are considered an important part of the food web. They are especially vital for fish such as trout, bass and catfish.

But just by stating said in that article ...... they know damn well that 90% of the people that read it ....... will think n' believe all those frigging streams down there in MTR country are just chock full of trout, bass and catfish that are dying by the truckloads because they don't have any Mayfles to eat.

And an added thought to think about, ..... no self respecting trout, bass or catfish can be found in any of those intermittent streams because they can not survive in them like minnows and chubs can.

.

I walk away every time Feed the Children shows some poor starving kid living in a trash heap. It's the same thing. They try and play on ones emotional responses to get what they desire. It's at best, deceiving.

I'm not of a mind that damage isn't done by MTM. I don't question that. Hell, anyone with even a lick of sense knows that if you move millions of tons of earth that damage is going to be done. What I question is the damage that is done, is it permanent and irrevocable. I’ve yet to see any evidence that it is, therefore, I don’t believe it is.

Aaron wrote:I'm not of a mind that damage isn't done by MTM. What I question is the damage that is done, is it permanent and irrevocable. I’ve yet to see any evidence that it is, therefore, I don’t believe it is.

The FBI complex in Clarksburg, WV (above) provides more than 3,000 West Virginia jobs. Completed in 1995, the complex is located on 986 acres of reclaimed land.


Mount View High School was built on an area that once was a mountaintop mining site. With McDowell County more than 90 percent hillside, land available for economic development is in short supply.


Twisted Gun Golf Course in Mingo County, West Virginia, is located on reclaimed land.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nma.org/images/FBI_Clarksburg2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nma.org/policy/reclamation/land_use_article.asp&h=162&w=225&sz=14&hl=en&start=40&um=1&tbnid=Sp5Uxg8gXCRMXM:&tbnh=78&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3DEastpoint%2BShopping%2BCenter%2BWV%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1G1GGLQ_ENUS276%26sa%3DN

.

Aaron: Considering that the bulk of the MTR sites are in southern WV, where is it affecting the fishies?


Sammy: Aaron, that is why one has to "pay close attention" when reading such reports and news articles ...... because NO WHERE did it state any fishies were being affected. It merilly stated piffling facts of no consequence, to wit:

So you are unaware of the MTR sites between French Creek and Elkins? The sites in Preston County between Bruceton Mills and Cheat Lake?

There are other parts of the state that are impacted, even if the bulk is in the southern part of the state.

I can see that you don't mind tearing up the po' folk in Mingo, Wyoming and Logan Counties. After all, that part of the state has already been trashed, right?

Of course, you can build a golf course on every MTR site. Doesn't matter if the locals can even afford to play them.

You two should take your act on the road.

I'll bet they'll like it down in War. After all, the coal companies have left them in such great shape.

You didn't answer the question TC. Seems your all hat and no cowboy.