More liquid manure

[salvelinus]

A few years ago I found massive littering at a campsite along the upper Kettle and reported it to the Susquehannock state forest office. A few days later a ranger called me and thanked me for the report. He told me that evidence had been found identifying the culprits, and, that in addition to the fine, they could either pay for the cleanup or come back and do it themselves. I was extremely grateful for the follow-up and I would not hesitate to report an incident again.

 

[Mike]

My situation was different in that I usually received a report directly over the phone. I would usually get some details and then tell the reporting individual that I would turn the case over to the WCO or the regional office along with the reporting individual's telephone number for possible follow-up. That was typically the end of my involvement. Most typically I did not know the outcome of the investigation.

When I found a case or potential case, especially when bike riding, I reported it to the WCO or the regional office and often indicated the quality of the case...strong, questionable, or weak. If I wanted to learn the outcome, I usually called back or waited until I had a conversation with the WCO sometime in the future. I always assumed that the case was being investigated in some way, although we might discuss a weak case in advance to avoid an unnecessary trip to the scene.

 

[rrt]

To be fair: I found out this afternoon that DEP did have people there at the time of the incident. I do not know what they concluded.

Mike: I guess I would just have appreciated an acknowledgement that they had received my call. Possibly down the line, I would be interested in what they found out. Manure management around here is a real problem. I was not looking to make unnecessary work for anyone.

 

[rrt]

Dave,

Yep, I know I'm old. It sucks, but there's nothing I can do about it except complain.

 

[ryansheehan]

Mike, I find your comment discouraging. A follow up phone call may encourage someone to report a future incident. Radio silence could send the message that no one cares. You are correct that it's not going to satisfy anyone, it's a $hitty situation but I think you're missing the point. A voice mail was left, an acknowledgment of the message should be made.

 

[poopdeck]

I agree with Mike. Maybe 100 people all reported the same thing that an official source like a fire company also reported. Maybe only one person called but I would prefer the limited resources be spent investigating this incident, and the countless other unrelated reported incidents, then calling people back to give them a placating courtesy call that does not solve the problem and stretches the very limited resources even more. I'm sure if the return call was vital to solving the problem it would have been made.

If the lack of a meaningless placating return call would cause you to not report a future environmental disaster then your priorities are muddled.

 

[troutbert]

poopdeck wrote:
I agree with Mike. Maybe 100 people all reported the same thing that an official source like a fire company also reported. Maybe only one person called but I would prefer the limited resources be spent investigating this incident, and the countless other unrelated reported incidents, then calling people back to give them a placating courtesy call that does not solve the problem and stretches the very limited resources even more. I'm sure if the return call was vital to solving the problem it would have been made.

If the lack of a meaningless placating return call would cause you to not report a future environmental disaster then your priorities are muddled.

Do 100 people report something like this?

I don't think so.

Two different times at different places I saw people digging out a stream channel with heavy machinery along well traveled state routes. One road was very busy, Route 322 not far from State College.

And another was more rural, but still plenty of cars use it, in Blair County.

So, hundreds of cars drove past the people digging out a stream with a big machine.

And in both cases, the people I reported it to did not know about the situation. No one else had reported it.

Not many people will "make the call" about a stream being polluted or channelized.

 

[Acristickid]

If you see something, say something.

 

[sandfly]

timbow, natural gas is free from dep. they don't get hit by them. nothing is done up here about any gas spills unless its a large one

 

[wildtrout2]

ryansheehan wrote:
Mike, I find your comment discouraging. A follow up phone call may encourage someone to report a future incident. Radio silence could send the message that no one cares. You are correct that it's not going to satisfy anyone, it's a $hitty situation but I think you're missing the point. A voice mail was left, an acknowledgment of the message should be made.

This hits the nail on the head!!!

You want folks to get involved in reporting things like this, then let them know their time wasn't wasted when they make a call. It's pretty basic, isn't it?

 

[Mike]

I see your points to some extent and they would have been something for me to consider, but I know that in many cases return calls are made by WCO's to get additional info and thank the caller.

This may just be me, but when I call an agency on the phone and leave a message, if I don't request a return call and I feel that I have left detailed enough information that the agency does not need to contact me, then I don't expect to receive a return call. In my life, that's pretty much the function of voice mail. And for those of you who have cell phones at home or work (neither for me), then isn't that why you text? What I do expect is that if appropriate they will take some form of action or add the info provided to their knowledge base for future reference. I don't make the assumption that nothing is being done if I don't hear about it; quite the contrary, I assume that they are doing their jobs. If I have concerns, I follow up.

In my case, when I received a very occasional voice message about a pollution case, I forwarded the info to law enforcement, or if unavailable, then to DEP, as field actions based on pollution reports from the public were not a general part of my duties. My concentration was solely on getting the proper info to an "action person" as quickly as possible. My way of going the extra mile was to investigate to the limited extent possible and provide quality observational and locational info to WCO's on the numerous cases that I would find when I was on my own time (not working).

On the other hand, when on the job I was pretty much the contact person for all snakehead info from around the state and I acknowledged nearly every report for years, particularly since most came from the SE, but on occasion referred a report to an AFM in another region for follow-up when the report originated in that region.

 

[poopdeck]

Do 100 people report something like this?

I don't think so.

Two different times at different places I saw people digging out a stream channel with heavy machinery along well traveled state routes. One road was very busy, Route 322 not far from State College.

And another was more rural, but still plenty of cars use it, in Blair County.

So, hundreds of cars drove past the people digging out a stream with a big machine.

And in both cases, the people I reported it to did not know about the situation. No one else had reported it.

Not many people will "make the call" about a stream being polluted or channelized.

Probably not. But in this scenario it was officially reported and there were official people on scene. Would you call and report a traffic accident If you drove past a traffic accident where the police, ambulance and tow trucks were on scene and then expect a return phone call thanking you for the report.

I realize I'm way more low maintenance then most but if I called and left a message about something like this I would not expect a return call unless my call was vital. I would have no desire to talk to somebody who is simply calling to say, thanks for the report, I can assure you we are on it. The lack of a return call, even if I felt it was necessary, would not prevent me from reporting future events.

You reported something you saw that didn't seem right. Kudos to you. You did the right thing. You spoke to somebody but if you didn't would you have needed a return call before making future reports to things you find amiss?

 

[rrt]

This thread has been a learning experience for me. When I noted I thought it was discourteous for the agencies not to reply to my calls, I guess I was naive about how things work, and I apologize to those whom I offended by expecting a reply. I assumed (and we all know what that signifies) my calls would be acknowledged with return calls.

Now that I know better, I will not expect a return call when/if I report future problems. I will hope, as has been noted in some of the posts about this topic, that the agencies are taking appropriate action regarding the problems.

 

[rrt]

This thread has been a learning experience for me. When I noted I thought it was discourteous for the agencies not to reply to my calls, I guess I was naive about how things work, and I apologize to those whom I offended by expecting a reply. I assumed (and we all know what that signifies) my calls would be acknowledged with return calls.

Now that I know better, I will not expect a return call when/if I report future problems. I will hope, as has been noted in some of the posts about this topic, that the agencies are taking appropriate action regarding the problems.