Coho-Killing 6PPD-Q 'The DDT Of Our Generation'

brought into a 24x24 catchbasin/sump with a downward 90 for the outlet, 18" of debris catchment minimum. oils float and solids sink. simple storm control.

ask me about complex ones.
I'm an engineer working as a civil construction project manager. I know that is the standard for subdivisions. Could you imagine the cost of curbing all highways and rural roads though o_O to direct the runoff into CB's. Also, The CB is unlikely to solve the problem, the particles will build up in the sump but as they sit there the 6ppdq will dissolve into the stagnant water which will then be released at the next storm event. Wetland biofiltration helps but is not feasible everywhere. The cost of dealing with this stuff once it enters the environment is astronomical. Really it would be better if we just stop introducing it. Pressure needs to be applied to tire manufacturers to stop using it.
 
I'm an engineer working as a civil construction project manager. I know that is the standard for subdivisions. Could you imagine the cost of curbing all highways and rural roads though o_O to direct the runoff into CB's. Also, The CB is unlikely to solve the problem, the particles will build up in the sump but as they sit there the 6ppdq will dissolve into the stagnant water which will then be released at the next storm event. Wetland biofiltration helps but is not feasible everywhere. The cost of dealing with this stuff once it enters the environment is astronomical. Really it would be better if we just stop introducing it. Pressure needs to be applied to tire manufacturers to stop using it.
Ideally - yes. Stop using it. I agree. But w/o that compound - tires would last less than half of what they last now. And it is uncertain how easy it is to find a non-toxic alternative. They thought that this compound (6PPD) was safe already - but the ozone present in the exhaust turns a reasonably non-toxic compound into a lethal one (6PPD-Q) for coho. Getting government to force the industry is unfortunately a longer-term goal.

There are some reasonably low-coast options though (this list is by no means complete):
1/ I don't think every road is necessarily an issue. Look for the areas with high-traffic highways next to & alongside (less than a couple hundred meters) a waterbody with coho and have direct road run-off into the watershed. This will narrow the scope of the problem,
2/ Either design some kind of a rain garden for where these road drains empty, and/or increase the road cleaning with road sweepers for that section of highway,
3/ Maybe the tire manufacturers could be convinced that these responses will be great PR & reasonably low cost implementations.
 
Here's an update and a couple of photos taken yesterday.

I stopped at the Sandy Pool to see if any Pinks were showing and, on a whim, walked across the road and up Detweiller to look at the situation I have shown earlier.

To my great surprise, someone in the City must have taken action because the flume that was there was gone, some obvious re-routing through a culvert had happened plus there was some riprap employed for bank stability.
Note different colors on curbs in the photos.
DSCN8502.JPG

DSCN8501.JPG

I was really stoked to see this and happy that some things that are reported are actually acted upon.
Runoff from the road will now carry on down to the flats and then go through the sand and gravel that give the Sandy Pool its name, rather than into an active little coho creek.

Kudo to the Campbell River staff that made this happen.

Detweiller Dumbasses no more.




Take care.
 
Here's an update and a couple of photos taken yesterday.

I stopped at the Sandy Pool to see if any Pinks were showing and, on a whim, walked across the road and up Detweiller to look at the situation I have shown earlier.

To my great surprise, someone in the City must have taken action because the flume that was there was gone, some obvious re-routing through a culvert had happened plus there was some riprap employed for bank stability.
Note different colors on curbs in the photos.

Take care.
Great news, Dave. Do you know if anyone did any 6PPD-Q testing before these changes @ that location? Would have been an opportunity to test effectiveness of mitigation measures...
 
Great news, Dave. Do you know if anyone did any 6PPD-Q testing before these changes @ that location? Would have been an opportunity to test effectiveness of mitigation measures...

I'll check with the group I work with tomorrow to see if they know anything about testing and stuff.







Take care.
 
Runoff from the road will now carry on down to the flats and then go through the sand and gravel that give the Sandy Pool its name, rather than into an active little coho creek.
Looks like the city added a catchbasin which is likely tied directly into that culvert. This is (arguably) worse than the flume that was there before. As i mentioned the solids will collect in the sump of the CB where they have time to soak and leach out chemicals. Then when you get a big enough rainfall, it will all flush into the creek at once, causing a potentially deadly spike.
1754414300166.png
 
Looks like the city added a catchbasin which is likely tied directly into that culvert. This is (arguably) worse than the flume that was there before. As i mentioned the solids will collect in the sump of the CB where they have time to soak and leach out chemicals. Then when you get a big enough rainfall, it will all flush into the creek at once, causing a potentially deadly spike.
View attachment 119275

Thank you for that observation.

I am but an ignorant layman, so any education is received with a welcome here.

I shall look into this a bit more.



Take care.
 
Great news, Dave. Do you know if anyone did any 6PPD-Q testing before these changes @ that location? Would have been an opportunity to test effectiveness of mitigation measures...


I asked about this and received this in reply from Keely Dodds, at Greenways Land Trust.

"Thanks for sending this along. I don't believe that anyone tests for 6PPD-Q on Detweiler, but if it's of interest we could reach out to VIU/BCCF to see if it can be added to the list."

We'll see what happens.




Take care.
 
This is just a comment and an opinion.

I've been around for decades now.

In the 50's 60's, 70's and 80's salmon runs were not endangered and those years are often used as bench marks.

But there were fewer concerns of water pollution. There were many toxic chemicals spilled into the water ways, likely much more than today paved roads and most gravel roads were sprayed down with oil and other chemicals to keep the dust down . These chemicals ran directly into the water ways.
But the fish flourished, didn't they?

I don't doubt that people have made an impact but historically pollution was 10X worse.

Population IMO is the biggest threat to salmon runs, the loss of habitat I would think has the biggest impact to runs other than the FFs that spilled viruses and promoted sea lice infestations. Which BTW since some, not all yet, FFs moved or were eliminated from salmon migration paths run sizes are rebounding along run the same timing. Moved a few years ago and runs recovering along migration timing, 2 yrs, 3 yrs 4 yrs ...etc. Now those runs won't recover in just one cycle because they were decimated but they are recovering much faster than estimated, most of them.

Coho have not been as widely "helped" with hatcheries, they have mostly targeted Chinook.

I can remember when 30+lb Coho were caught in the 60's on Vancouver Island just off Sooke.

Anyway there are lots of folks making big money and careers to find out many things, for most history isn't counted because there wasn't a scientist or enough of them to say that the runs were okay. It seems for some the house can be burning down but they will spend time wondering why before acknowledging that the fire is hot, why the fire? Forget the building.

Summer time rambling, that is all.

I have no doubt that runoff hurts fish, it has since the 1930's. Campbell River knows all about toxic spills.
 
Back
Top