Scratch Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I think it's time for us to start getting angry with our local government and business. Another roadway conservation tragedy will have effects for the next decade. When do we start requiring municipalities to protect waterways appropriately and ensure that the transportation of dangerous goods will be properly safeguarded? See article here: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Malahat+...9292/story.html 40,000 litres of gasoline into a protected stream ecosystem. So long to 7 species of salmon and sport fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garhan Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Seems to me we just need to stop drinking mostly at work. Especially true if this guy is charged. Unfortunately you cant fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolly Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Seems to me we just need to stop drinking mostly at work. Especially true if this guy is charged. Unfortunately you cant fix stupid.Stupid does not excuse the fact that this driver deliberately climbed into the cab of that truck after consuming any amount of alcohol.there should be a zero tolerance for drivers of these types of vehicles! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dipperdan Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Seems to me we just need to stop drinking mostly at work. Especially true if this guy is charged. Unfortunately you cant fix stupid.I agree! 0 tolerance for all drivers, is it just the fish though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garhan Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 I realize its is also about the fish. But the government is partially to blame here, after all they are the one that picked the route for the roads. Yes I know roads are set to take the path of least resistance. And waterways are a natural depending on the environment and climate. If you look at how long that road has been around, then I would think things have been leaching into that watershed for years. No excuse but who really started the problems. A drunk, or was it poor civil planning by todays standards. im sure we cant fix all the wrongs of the past. But we can vote to change things. lol... As if.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inconnu Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Anyone who knows the Malahat will know there really is no better or worse route as far as the path of least resistance goes, It has been where it is since Model A's ran the trip from Victoria north. I used to fish the Goldstream when I was younger and more flexible. The area of the crash would put it very close to the estuary, which is bad of course, but with some help from high spring tides the damage may be somewhat reduced we will probably never get the truth out of anyone on this. It is true that the routes of some highways may be better picked, but it is also true that the operators of commercial or private vehicles need to not only act responsably but be held responsable for their actions. The comment in the article said " Columbia Fuels will pay for much of the clean-up and remediation." I have to ask which part they would not be paying for? The fish kill will be disastrous but again, hopefully the location mixed with tidal action will help disperse the worst of the spill. Follow this link for a bit more info on the highway itself…….Kerry http://www.shawniganlakemuseum.com/malahat.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.