Spill on Fishing Creek

[wildtrout2]

A truck hauling hot liquid tar overturned today on Rt 487 and spilled thousands of gallons into the stream. Owner of Fishing Creek Campground says he'll have to close the campground because "that stuff isn't going anywhere any time soon". He said "without the creek we have nothing here". What a shame

 

[jifigz]

I hate hearing/reading things like this. We try our best for nature and our needs for human civilaztion to coexist but unfortunately it doesn't always work out as planned. I am unfamiliar with this stream, but how far up the creek did this occur? What is this a tributary to?

 

[Fishidiot]

Thanks for the heads-up.

Which "Fishing Creek" is this - the one near Benton? Not familiar with RT 487.

Please keep us informed of any developing information.

 

[Rolf]

That campground is located just south of Orangeville. Yes it's the one that runs through Benton.

 

[DaveKile]

Here is a news report on the situation from WNEP.

 

[krayfish2]

Trucker driving too fast? Shocking. Hopefully the environmental impact isn't too bad. Driver should be ticketed appropriately and driver / company should pay for clean up, restock stream and clover lost income for campground.

 

[Swattie87]

krayfish2 wrote:
driver / company should pay for clean up, restock stream and clover lost income for campground.

Ain't dat wat in-surance is for? "I pay my in-surance."

Not at all what any watershed needs, nonetheless that one. The high water hopefully will help minimize any impacts...or in the case of tar spread it worse?

 

[Keith]

I have a camper there. Not a good situation.

 

[greenghost]

Out of curiosity, wouldn't this clean-up in the stream be relatively easy compared to a chemical or liquid oil spill? Once the hot tar hits the cold water, shouldn't it solidify? There may some residual oils released but with the higher water that would flush out of the watershed relatively quickly? The tar on the land however is another story.

 

[duckfoot]

greenghost wrote:
Out of curiosity, wouldn't this clean-up in the stream be relatively easy compared to a chemical or liquid oil spill? Once the hot tar hits the cold water, shouldn't it solidify? There may some residual oils released but with the higher water that would flush out of the watershed relatively quickly? The tar on the land however is another story.

Read up on DNAPLs. When this stuff gets in the stream, they'll go to the bottom and extinguish nearly all aquatic life. No food for the fish.

Thankfully, everything north of this will be unaffected, so the Fishing Creek Sportsman's Club's stocking efforts will not go to waste.

What about the smallmouth and catfish in the Susquehanna in Catawissa?

 

[PAgeologist]

Tar, being a petroleum product, would fall under the LNAPL category. Excavating the product that solidified in water and on the land along will get rid of the source. Some oil absorbing socks/booms across the top of the water should absorb any residual oils floating downstream. Not great for the watershed obviously, but it shouldnt be any huge long term effects if its cleaned up quickly and properly.

 

[zephyr]

This is such a shame. I got to fish this creek in the early spring with some great results. This truly is a beautifully creek. However, this looks like a long term project to revitalize the creek back to its original state. Such a Shame

 

[Chaz]

I would call it the lower end of Big Fishing Creek, the one that flows through Benton not Lamar. And yes some maps call it Big Fishing Creek. A stocked section of the creek that also holds wild trout.
Insurance doesn't cover driving too fast and causing an environmental disaster.

 

[duckfoot]

PAgeologist wrote:
Tar, being a petroleum product, would fall under the LNAPL category.

Oh, right, the residual greasy stuff. I was thinking of the sludge.

 

[Swattie87]

Chaz wrote:
Insurance doesn't cover driving too fast and causing an environmental disaster.

Yes it does. I'm sure there's a commercial and not a personal policy at play here, but either would be required to carry "property damage liability" coverage on it. There are usually almost no exclusions that apply to that coverage other than damage to the policy holder's own property, intentional acts, and street racing.

It'll cover whatever you damage of someone else's. Both physical and potentially economical damage to the innocent party. Essentially whatever the innocent party could reasonably be expected to recover in court if they sued. Driving too fast (negligence) and causing environmental damage is definitely covered. If the campground could prove a loss of income as a direct result of the accident (difficult to do at times) that would be covered too.

 

[wildtrout2]

Swattie87 wrote:

Chaz wrote:
Insurance doesn't cover driving too fast and causing an environmental disaster.

It'll cover whatever you damage of someone else's. Both physical and potentially economical damage to the innocent party. Essentially whatever the innocent party could reasonably be expected to recover in court if they sued. Driving too fast (negligence) and causing environmental damage is definitely covered. If the campground could prove a loss of income as a direct result of the accident (difficult to do at times) that would be covered too.

Certainly it will be covered. And, I think after enough time passes, the owner of the campground will be able to prove loss of business at the campground and will be monetarily compensated. Still a damn shame!

 

[FarmerDave]

OK, it was mentioned that this is petroleum based and LNAPL. Duckfoot mentioned it could be somewhat DNAPL which is worse.

I'm not a chemist or geologist, however I do know enough about this stuff to be dangerous. But that is about it. So keep that in mind when I ask...

Do we know for sure it was petroleum based? I think it likely was, but do we know it wasn't a coal tar?

Coal tar which is often used as a driveway sealant is somewhat water soluble and can cause a different set of problems. It can get into the bottom sediment and the surrounding soil and be around for a LONG time.

 

[duckfoot]

^ I guess we'd have to ask. For those that are concerned, contact this club:

http://www.fishingcreeksportsmanassn.org/

They would know the skinny on anything related to this spill.

 

[PALongbow]

Bad deal all the way around. I own a section of Fishing Creek in Benton and purchased it solely for fishing. After this occurred I thought to myself what if this would have happened on my stretch of stream. What would be the long term impact of this spill on the aquatic life and also local economy that relies on fisherman's dollars to help keep the business's going. Without sounding like a tree hugger we need to provide more protection for these watersheds and if these things do happen there needs to be very stiff penalties and accountability.

Ron

 

[Chaz]

Swattie87 wrote:

Chaz wrote:
Insurance doesn't cover driving too fast and causing an environmental disaster.

Yes it does. I'm sure there's a commercial and not a personal policy at play here, but either would be required to carry "property damage liability" coverage on it. There are usually almost no exclusions that apply to that coverage other than damage to the policy holder's own property, intentional acts, and street racing.

It'll cover whatever you damage of someone else's. Both physical and potentially economical damage to the innocent party. Essentially whatever the innocent party could reasonably be expected to recover in court if they sued. Driving too fast (negligence) and causing environmental damage is definitely covered. If the campground could prove a loss of income as a direct result of the accident (difficult to do at times) that would be covered too.

As with all insurance there are limits to the coverage. Negligence usually isn't covered, and more than like;y the State will call it negligence.