Conewago Creek Contamination

[Lunker_Bacon]

I just saw on social media that runoff from a fire at a local chemical plant just happened and contaminated the Conewago. They are saying for boaters, anglers and swimmers to stay out of the creek for at least a week until the chemicals "wash out of the creek". Is that all they can do for a chemical spill, just to let it flow down the creek? I do not intend to take anything away from emergency services, because they do good work. But wouldn't you think there would be an emergency safety protocol for a company to follow that would at least minimize the impact from a disaster such as this one? I am not familiar at all with conservation or environmental protection laws, but could there be a way to implement a backup solution for unexpected disasters to mills or factories especially that close to a recovering watershed? Because this could do some serious damage to wildlife (correct me if I am wrong, for I am not too knowledgeable on how much chemical runoff and pollution an ecosystem like that can take). I would love to hear preventative ideas that yall have.

Here is a link to the story:
http://www.local21news.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/Adams-Co-creek-contaminated-likely-by-chemical-fire-runoff-147306.shtml

 

[charliepff]

They are not flowing one or two hose lines for a fire like that. They flowed hundreds of thousands of gallons of water to put that fire out. There are hazmat teams for containing these issues, but when you start getting into such large flows it is nearly impossible to do. Especially when thousands of gallons of water has already been lobbed into the building and the spill contractors are an hour away.

Like I said, DEP, county EMA's, and other places have contact resources for help and containment so there are already state laws and policies in place for a situation. Anywhere from 10 gallons of fuel on the ground to massive chemical fires. T

 

[duckfoot]

Yep, all you can do is let it flush itself out. Hopefully, the spill only contained LNAPLS and not DNAPLS.

 

[LetortAngler]

Likely wont see any hatches in that section for a looong time as well.

 

[Mike]

Letort,
Not necessarily. Macroinvertebrates are not just at the surface of a stream bottom, but deeper in the gravel as well. Escape for some is possible.

 

[LetortAngler]

Hooefully. Time will tell.

 

[Fishidiot]

Just FYI:
If you're not familiar with this event or Conewago, it should be noted that the section affected by the chemical fire is not the ATW trout section, which is upstream in Adams County. The section in question is, however, a favorite WW section of mine and I'm obviously concerned about the bass and sunnies there. Although trite consolation. . .it should be remembered that streams often bounce back pretty quickly from one-shot fish kills such as this.

For the time being, DEP has issued a ban on recreational use of the stream. Although the ATW was not in the spill zone, the DEP prohibition did not indicate boundary limits on the no-recreation ban.

 

[Gone_Phishin]

I'm pretty torn up about this. I fish that stream atleast 3x a month. I checked a section that I fish regularly last night and saw no signs of dead fish or chemicals. I'm afraid it just hasn't reached my area but only time will tell.

 

[Gone_Phishin]

John Eline, the Adams County director of emergency services, said nitrate, nitrite and a substance called total organic carbon are the main causes for the contamination of the Conewago Creek in Adams County.


http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2015/06/miller_chemical_fertilizer_pla_2.html

Any idea if this is a LNAPLS or DNAPLS?

 

[FarmerDave]

If the spill was JUST the fertilizer components described, then my guess is that it is neither.

The NA part in both LNAPLS and DNAPLS stands for Non-Aquas meaning not water soluble.

L is for Light and would include diesel fuel, gasoline and other hydrocarbons which are lighter than water. Nasty stuff, but easier to clean up because it doesn't mix well with water and is lighter than water so it doesn't sink deep in the aquifer.

D in the second one is for Dense and would include things like PCBs, heavy metals, coal tars, very heavy crude, etc. Much harder to get rid of because it sinks deep into the mud.

This stuff is neither and is likely water soluble so in addition to the initial obvious problems, some will likely seep into the soils and we will see some effect for awhile in the form of more algae and plant growth. but being nitrates and nitrides, the plants will eventually use it up.

Disclaimer: Some of that is guessing and wishful thinking. I'm not a geo-chemist, so maybe duck can provide more input on that.

 

[Fishidiot]

Thanks for the info Dave.

I dropped by Conewago to take a look today. The section I checked was just a few miles from the burn site in Hanover. Saw no dead fish; water was off color but we have had some storms lately. With the poor clarity, I had difficulty trying to pick out live fish - did see some, but not many. I also checked closer to the burn site in another section but it too looked normal except for the off color water. I saw DEP folks at the stream but they were driving and I didn't get a chance to chat.

 

[FarmerDave]

Other than their potency and lack of trace minerals, there is little difference in the end product between synthetic and organic fertilizer from the plant's perspective. Plants use them in the same way. It's gonna get used up.

From the environmental standpoint, the objection to synthetic fertilizer has to do more with how it is produced. Production of synthetic fertilizer, although cheaper, is less environmentally friendly.

I know nothing about that particular "factory," but will assume that the nitrides and nitrates are produced synthetically from Natural Gas. That is why I qualified what I said earlier. If it was just end product that was spilled, then it is likely neither LNAPLS or DNAPLS and if so, the negative effects should not be long lived.

 

[duckfoot]

FarmerDave wrote:
Disclaimer: Some of that is guessing and wishful thinking. I'm not a geo-chemist, so maybe duck can provide more input on that.

I have nothing to add or correct to anything you said. :-D

 

[Fishidiot]

Restrictions on fishing and recreational uses of the creek have been lifted by DEP.

 

[glenrockonthefly]

Fished a section in York County Monday eve and did well plenty of SMB see my entry in Stream Reports