Quantcast

Comments about ‘Report: Majority of nation's rivers, streams in poor health’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, April 1 2013 5:05 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Phranc
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

But, but, but, I thought we got to act with wanten disregard because we couldn't possibly effect our environment.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Right, Phranc, and besides, who really needs clean water? Just think of all that money being wasted on testing and junk like that? Cut our taxes and stop the nonsense.

Besides, brown water just might be a whole lot more tasty than the clear stuff.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

There is huge problem here! What does "poor biological health" mean? Contaminates? I live in an area where there are a lot of heavy metals in the soil, naturally occurring heavy metals; lead, silver, zinc, molybdenum and a few others. For centuries before white men arrived these metals have been naturally leaching into the rivers and streams and lakes by run off from the watersheds. Ten years ago the EPA came in as wasted millions of taxpayer monies to "clean up" the rivers. All they did was stir up naturally occurring sentiment in rivers and streams bottoms by dredging and now the rivers and many lakes have MORE heavy metals than before. I am not saying we should pollute but come on people, nature pollutes too!

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

We need to get rid of the EPA and other socialistic environmental policies that protect us and save lives.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments