Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  Messages 1 - 25 of 29 - Expand all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)   Newer >
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
HWS  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 9:34 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: s...@yeah.ca (HWS)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:33:02 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 9:33 am
Subject: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Austin residents: Get ready to pay more in taxes for a BIG lawsuit
over this... Not to mention clean-up costs. Meanwhile, tell your
friends not to come near the poison hole.

--------------------

Toxic chemicals taint Barton waters
Pool, other city creeks may pose health risk; decades-old fuel waste
cited as possible source

By Kevin Carmody
and Mike Ward

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Sunday, January 19, 2003

Levels of toxic chemicals in Barton Springs Pool and just upstream on
a hillside overlooking the pool have exceeded those found in a dozen
of the worst hazardous waste sites in the country, an Austin
American-Statesman investigation has found.

At points along three other Austin bodies of water - East Bouldin
Creek, Waller Creek and the Central Market ponds at Lamar Boulevard
and West 45th Street - levels of chemicals that increase the risk of
cancer after prolonged exposure also have exceeded those found at
toxic waste sites that federal authorities have declared public health
hazards or Superfund sites.

Scientists who reviewed test results documenting the contamination say
the data suggest that the pollution found in the pool and along the
hillside is from hazardous waste dumped nearby. The most likely
culprit, they say, is waste from coal gasification plants that
produced fuel for city lighting from the 1870s to 1928.

Two toxicologists said the elevated levels of the neurotoxic metal
arsenic and seven benzene-based compounds found in sediments at Barton
Springs warrant temporarily closing Austin's environmental treasure,
the spring-fed pool whose iconic value has driven more than a decade
of anti-development campaigning and reshaped city politics. They
recommend closing the pool until questions about public safety are
resolved. The pool attracts an average of about 1,000 paid visitors a
day.

Scientists also recommend that warning signs be posted to alert
swimmers and fishermen to risks and that site assessments be done at
the worst areas to document the extent and source of the
contamination.

Though the city found the chemicals in the springs area as early as
1994, its focus in its testing program was on the endangered Barton
Springs salamander and not on human health, city officials
acknowledge.

The newspaper's findings go beyond its report in August, which showed
that the presence of one benzene-based chemical, benzo(a)pyrene,
sometimes exceeded state safety guidelines at the pool and on the
hillside. Atop that hillside sit the Barton Springs Park Place
apartments, at 1200 Barton Hills Drive in the Barton Hills
neighborhood.

City officials said then that the carcinogen was not detected often
enough to close the pool or pose any health concern for people.

The city maintained its position until Jan. 10, when nine city
officials and their consultants met with editors and reporters of the
American-Statesman. Because of the seriousness of the findings, the
newspaper wanted to give the city a briefing and another opportunity
for response before publication.

After the Jan. 10 meeting, City Manager Toby Futrell ordered her staff
to take samples of sediment in the pool and Barton Creek on Jan. 11.

On Tuesday, the top public health authority in Austin and Travis
County said that he and city officials now realize the hillside may
pose a risk and needs a full assessment but that they don't have
enough information about the level of exposure in the pool to know
whether it poses a risk to swimmers.

"I think we all agree that we have a problem on the hillside," Dr. Ed
Sherwood said. "I don't think there's any question about that."

City officials said they think seal coat treatments on streets and
parking lots are the cause of the hillside contamination.

The newspaper's new findings suggest that swimmers in the pool and
Barton Creek have been exposed not just to one contaminant but to a
toxic stew of tainted sediment at least periodically for seven years,
probably longer. The findings detail problems with arsenic and
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a family of more than 100 chemicals
known as PAHs.

Seven of those benzene-based chemicals - one of them benzo(a)pyrene -
are the most dangerous of the PAH family, federal health officials
say. The newspaper's findings are based on city tests of sediment and
soil from 1991 to 2002 and a review of 11,000 pages of city documents
obtained under the Texas open records law.

All six experts who provided a detailed assessment of the test results
said the extraordinarily high levels and the number of contaminants
found upstream in Barton Creek and on the hillside, including
neurotoxins such as mercury and the pesticide heptachlor, indicate
there may be previously unknown hazardous waste sites nearby.

It is possible, the newspaper's experts said, that the pollution came
from coal gasification plants whose wastes might have been dumped on
the ground or in an old gravel pit that was filled in before the
Barton Hills neighborhood developed.

An e-mail obtained from the city under the Texas open records law
shows that the serious nature of the contamination at the pool, creek
and hillside had independent confirmation in early 2002 by scientists
with the U.S. Geological Survey, the federal government's sciences
research arm. A federal scientist reported to city officials that she
was shocked by the "astronomical" levels of benzene compounds recorded
in USGS tests.

Pete Van Metre, another USGS scientist who advises the city on water
quality issues, told the newspaper he cautioned city staff that the
levels upstream, particularly on the hillside creek bed, were higher
than his agency had ever detected anywhere in the country in routine
surveys of waterways. Those levels would be expected "at a
contaminated industrial site," Van Metre said he told them in May
2001.

The newspaper also found elevated levels of the benzene compounds. In
December, sediment from shallow areas along the northwest side of the
pool was collected by two reporters and sent to a state-certified lab
in Round Rock, DHL Analytical Inc., for analysis. The tests showed
levels of benzene compounds higher than the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has deemed safe for regular human contact.

Assessing the risks

The hillside contains a tree-lined dry creek bed as deep as 6 feet in
some places with its upper portions strewn with rock, concrete and
chunks of asphalt. When rain falls, the water flows to Barton Creek
below.

The hillside has repeatedly recorded the seven benzene compounds above
the minimum level of 1,000 parts per billion that can make a
residential or recreational area eligible for the federal Superfund
list of the nation's most dangerous toxic sites needing cleanup. In
one test, the compounds were found at 355 times that minimum.

The seven benzene compounds are listed by federal and international
health agencies as either probable or possible human carcinogens.
Arsenic is considered a known human carcinogen.

The EPA assumes that a safe level of the seven benzene compounds in
the soil or sediment is 90 ppb or below. In the pool, the peak levels
have been up to nearly 100 times higher, and nearly nine times the
minimum that can qualify a site in a recreational or residential
setting for a federal Superfund cleanup.

Scientists think the other locations with elevated levels of the
benzene compounds - East Bouldin Creek, Waller Creek and the Central
Market ponds - could have become contaminated by a variety of sources,
including coal gas waste and leaking underground petroleum storage
tanks.

In four other areas, along Shoal, Blunn and Harper's Branch creeks and
Taylor Slough, the city's tests have recorded contaminant levels that
exceed some state or federal safety guidelines. However, according to
the EPA, the levels of chemicals and apparently low frequency of human
exposure at most of those sites might not be great enough for action
under the federal Superfund law.

Around the country, about 600 sites contaminated with the benzene
compounds have qualified for Superfund cleanups. Documents and
interviews with EPA Superfund staff identified a dozen sites where the
benzene compounds were among the primary pollution concerns and were
found at levels comparable to or lower than some of the Austin sites.

In New Hampshire, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, a branch of the federal Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, declared a public health hazard and banned swimming in the
Winnipesaukee River near the former Messer Street Manufactured Gas
Plant. Contamination of shallow sediment in the river in comparable
samples had peak levels lower than the peak found in Barton Springs
Pool.

In suburban Houston, Patrick Bayou joined the Superfund priority list
on Sept. 5. It also had peak readings of the benzene compounds at
lower levels than the peak detected in the pool and at about half the
level the City of Austin detected in November 2000.

Near Conroe, the United Creosote site made the list with levels of
soil contamination significantly lower in comparable samples than what
has been recorded on the Barton Creek hillside.

The city knew about the high levels of the benzene compounds in the
pool as early as 1995. City officials had mentioned the chemicals in
several reports to the City Council and other government agencies. The
reports were available but not widely distributed to the public. They
typically suggested the chemicals might pose a threat to the
endangered salamander but did not address whether they might be
harmful to people.

Although the American-Statesman's August article prominently stated
that a state toxicologist said there was no immediate health risk at
the pool, city officials denounced the article as unnecessarily scary
and "inappropriate."

City officials hired toxicologists to assess the health effects
information on Jan. 10, and they started working immediately.

At the meeting at the American-Statesman, the city officials were
asked how they ...

read more »


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Hammerhead  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 9:37 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "Hammerhead" <bh...@netscape.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:37:51 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 9:37 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Does this come as a surprise?  Galveston waters are the same way.  Not to
mention, that the pollution coming out of Galveston is killing off marine
life in the Gulf of Mexico. Barbaric!
"HWS" <s...@yeah.ca> wrote in message news:3e2ab4fc.3648870@news.io.com...

: Austin residents: Get ready to pay more in taxes for a BIG lawsuit
: over this... Not to mention clean-up costs. Meanwhile, tell your
: friends not to come near the poison hole.
:
: --------------------
:
: Toxic chemicals taint Barton waters
: Pool, other city creeks may pose health risk; decades-old fuel waste
: cited as possible source
:
: By Kevin Carmody
: and Mike Ward
:
: AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
:
: Sunday, January 19, 2003
:
: Levels of toxic chemicals in Barton Springs Pool and just upstream on
: a hillside overlooking the pool have exceeded those found in a dozen
: of the worst hazardous waste sites in the country, an Austin
: American-Statesman investigation has found.
:
: At points along three other Austin bodies of water - East Bouldin
: Creek, Waller Creek and the Central Market ponds at Lamar Boulevard
: and West 45th Street - levels of chemicals that increase the risk of
: cancer after prolonged exposure also have exceeded those found at
: toxic waste sites that federal authorities have declared public health
: hazards or Superfund sites.
:
: Scientists who reviewed test results documenting the contamination say
: the data suggest that the pollution found in the pool and along the
: hillside is from hazardous waste dumped nearby. The most likely
: culprit, they say, is waste from coal gasification plants that
: produced fuel for city lighting from the 1870s to 1928.
:
: Two toxicologists said the elevated levels of the neurotoxic metal
: arsenic and seven benzene-based compounds found in sediments at Barton
: Springs warrant temporarily closing Austin's environmental treasure,
: the spring-fed pool whose iconic value has driven more than a decade
: of anti-development campaigning and reshaped city politics. They
: recommend closing the pool until questions about public safety are
: resolved. The pool attracts an average of about 1,000 paid visitors a
: day.
:
: Scientists also recommend that warning signs be posted to alert
: swimmers and fishermen to risks and that site assessments be done at
: the worst areas to document the extent and source of the
: contamination.
:
: Though the city found the chemicals in the springs area as early as
: 1994, its focus in its testing program was on the endangered Barton
: Springs salamander and not on human health, city officials
: acknowledge.
:
: The newspaper's findings go beyond its report in August, which showed
: that the presence of one benzene-based chemical, benzo(a)pyrene,
: sometimes exceeded state safety guidelines at the pool and on the
: hillside. Atop that hillside sit the Barton Springs Park Place
: apartments, at 1200 Barton Hills Drive in the Barton Hills
: neighborhood.
:
: City officials said then that the carcinogen was not detected often
: enough to close the pool or pose any health concern for people.
:
: The city maintained its position until Jan. 10, when nine city
: officials and their consultants met with editors and reporters of the
: American-Statesman. Because of the seriousness of the findings, the
: newspaper wanted to give the city a briefing and another opportunity
: for response before publication.
:
: After the Jan. 10 meeting, City Manager Toby Futrell ordered her staff
: to take samples of sediment in the pool and Barton Creek on Jan. 11.
:
: On Tuesday, the top public health authority in Austin and Travis
: County said that he and city officials now realize the hillside may
: pose a risk and needs a full assessment but that they don't have
: enough information about the level of exposure in the pool to know
: whether it poses a risk to swimmers.
:
: "I think we all agree that we have a problem on the hillside," Dr. Ed
: Sherwood said. "I don't think there's any question about that."
:
: City officials said they think seal coat treatments on streets and
: parking lots are the cause of the hillside contamination.
:
: The newspaper's new findings suggest that swimmers in the pool and
: Barton Creek have been exposed not just to one contaminant but to a
: toxic stew of tainted sediment at least periodically for seven years,
: probably longer. The findings detail problems with arsenic and
: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a family of more than 100 chemicals
: known as PAHs.
:
: Seven of those benzene-based chemicals - one of them benzo(a)pyrene -
: are the most dangerous of the PAH family, federal health officials
: say. The newspaper's findings are based on city tests of sediment and
: soil from 1991 to 2002 and a review of 11,000 pages of city documents
: obtained under the Texas open records law.
:
: All six experts who provided a detailed assessment of the test results
: said the extraordinarily high levels and the number of contaminants
: found upstream in Barton Creek and on the hillside, including
: neurotoxins such as mercury and the pesticide heptachlor, indicate
: there may be previously unknown hazardous waste sites nearby.
:
: It is possible, the newspaper's experts said, that the pollution came
: from coal gasification plants whose wastes might have been dumped on
: the ground or in an old gravel pit that was filled in before the
: Barton Hills neighborhood developed.
:
: An e-mail obtained from the city under the Texas open records law
: shows that the serious nature of the contamination at the pool, creek
: and hillside had independent confirmation in early 2002 by scientists
: with the U.S. Geological Survey, the federal government's sciences
: research arm. A federal scientist reported to city officials that she
: was shocked by the "astronomical" levels of benzene compounds recorded
: in USGS tests.
:
: Pete Van Metre, another USGS scientist who advises the city on water
: quality issues, told the newspaper he cautioned city staff that the
: levels upstream, particularly on the hillside creek bed, were higher
: than his agency had ever detected anywhere in the country in routine
: surveys of waterways. Those levels would be expected "at a
: contaminated industrial site," Van Metre said he told them in May
: 2001.
:
: The newspaper also found elevated levels of the benzene compounds. In
: December, sediment from shallow areas along the northwest side of the
: pool was collected by two reporters and sent to a state-certified lab
: in Round Rock, DHL Analytical Inc., for analysis. The tests showed
: levels of benzene compounds higher than the U.S. Environmental
: Protection Agency has deemed safe for regular human contact.
:
: Assessing the risks
:
: The hillside contains a tree-lined dry creek bed as deep as 6 feet in
: some places with its upper portions strewn with rock, concrete and
: chunks of asphalt. When rain falls, the water flows to Barton Creek
: below.
:
: The hillside has repeatedly recorded the seven benzene compounds above
: the minimum level of 1,000 parts per billion that can make a
: residential or recreational area eligible for the federal Superfund
: list of the nation's most dangerous toxic sites needing cleanup. In
: one test, the compounds were found at 355 times that minimum.
:
: The seven benzene compounds are listed by federal and international
: health agencies as either probable or possible human carcinogens.
: Arsenic is considered a known human carcinogen.
:
: The EPA assumes that a safe level of the seven benzene compounds in
: the soil or sediment is 90 ppb or below. In the pool, the peak levels
: have been up to nearly 100 times higher, and nearly nine times the
: minimum that can qualify a site in a recreational or residential
: setting for a federal Superfund cleanup.
:
: Scientists think the other locations with elevated levels of the
: benzene compounds - East Bouldin Creek, Waller Creek and the Central
: Market ponds - could have become contaminated by a variety of sources,
: including coal gas waste and leaking underground petroleum storage
: tanks.
:
: In four other areas, along Shoal, Blunn and Harper's Branch creeks and
: Taylor Slough, the city's tests have recorded contaminant levels that
: exceed some state or federal safety guidelines. However, according to
: the EPA, the levels of chemicals and apparently low frequency of human
: exposure at most of those sites might not be great enough for action
: under the federal Superfund law.
:
: Around the country, about 600 sites contaminated with the benzene
: compounds have qualified for Superfund cleanups. Documents and
: interviews with EPA Superfund staff identified a dozen sites where the
: benzene compounds were among the primary pollution concerns and were
: found at levels comparable to or lower than some of the Austin sites.
:
: In New Hampshire, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
: Registry, a branch of the federal Centers for Disease Control and
: Prevention, declared a public health hazard and banned swimming in the
: Winnipesaukee River near the former Messer Street Manufactured Gas
: Plant. Contamination of shallow sediment in the river in comparable
: samples had peak levels lower than the peak found in Barton Springs
: Pool.
:
: In suburban Houston, Patrick Bayou joined the Superfund priority list
: on Sept. 5. It also had peak readings of the benzene compounds at
: lower levels than the peak detected in the pool and at about half the
: level the City of Austin detected in November 2000.
:
: Near Conroe, the United Creosote site made the list with levels of
: soil contamination significantly lower in comparable samples than what
: has been recorded on the Barton Creek hillside.
:
: The city knew about the high levels of the benzene compounds in the
: pool as early as 1995. City officials had mentioned the chemicals in
: several reports to the City Council and other government agencies. The
: reports were available but not widely ...

read more »


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Neal Atkins  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 9:50 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: natk...@austin.rr.com (Neal Atkins)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:48:49 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 9:48 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:33:02 GMT, s...@yeah.ca (HWS) wrote:
>Toxic chemicals taint Barton waters
>Pool, other city creeks may pose health risk; decades-old fuel waste
>cited as possible source

Now we have an explanation for why most Austinites are liberal.
They're MAD AS HATTERS!  Having been exposed to a few parts per
billion of a supposed "dangerous" chemical has obviously caused this
long term effect.

I think the solution is to close South Austin and move it to East
Austin.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
H. Adam Stevens  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 10:15 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "H. Adam Stevens" <s...@totalaccess.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 09:14:05 -0600
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 10:14 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
I always thought there was something in the water.
UT, The Legislature, Redneck Rock, now it all makes sense.
bwahahahahahahaaa

"Neal Atkins" <natk...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message

news:3e2aba51.13682468@news-server.austin.rr.com...


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Proud Yankee  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 2:45 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "Proud Yankee" <sd...@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:45:19 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 2:45 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

"HWS" <s...@yeah.ca> wrote in message news:3e2ab4fc.3648870@news.io.com...
> Austin residents: Get ready to pay more in taxes for a BIG lawsuit
> over this... Not to mention clean-up costs. Meanwhile, tell your
> friends not to come near the poison hole.

Meanwhile the city is still claiming it's safe to swim in the pool:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/news/2003/springssafety.htm

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Dusty Rhodes  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 5:21 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@SPAMMENOTtexas.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:20:04 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
"Neal Atkins" <natk...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message

news:3e2aba51.13682468@news-server.austin.rr.com...

> On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:33:02 GMT, s...@yeah.ca (HWS) wrote:

> >Toxic chemicals taint Barton waters
> >Pool, other city creeks may pose health risk; decades-old fuel waste
> >cited as possible source

> Now we have an explanation for why most Austinites are liberal.
> They're MAD AS HATTERS!  Having been exposed to a few parts per
> billion of a supposed "dangerous" chemical has obviously caused this
> long term effect.

> I think the solution is to close South Austin and move it to East
> Austin.

Stop thinking and the pain will go away.

Cheers,

Dusty


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Neal Atkins  
View profile  
 More options Jan 19 2003, 7:40 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: natk...@austin.rr.com (Neal Atkins)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:38:37 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 19 2003 7:38 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:20:04 GMT, "Dusty Rhodes"

<te...@SPAMMENOTtexas.net> wrote:
>> >Toxic chemicals taint Barton waters
>> >Pool, other city creeks may pose health risk; decades-old fuel waste
>> >cited as possible source

>> Now we have an explanation for why most Austinites are liberal.
>> They're MAD AS HATTERS!  Having been exposed to a few parts per
>> billion of a supposed "dangerous" chemical has obviously caused this
>> long term effect.

>> I think the solution is to close South Austin and move it to East
>> Austin.

>Stop thinking and the pain will go away.

Nah, if YOU go away, that would help.  BTW, did you hear Kllinton was
coming to town?  Better exercise your knees.  It won't hurt so much
when you blow him.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Vindicator  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 12:37 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "Vindicator" <no...@nonesuch.orgasm>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:36:48 GMT
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 12:36 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Get this:  they knew FOR SURE in May 2001 and yet they let humans swim
there!!!!

They knew as far back as 1994, apparently.

Everyone who swam there should SUE the City of Austin and "Save our Springs"
and everyone else who covered up this medical and public health disaster.

Vindicator

"An e-mail obtained from the city under the Texas open records law
shows that the serious nature of the contamination at the pool, creek
and hillside had independent confirmation in early 2002 by scientists
with the U.S. Geological Survey, the federal government's sciences
research arm. A federal scientist reported to city officials that she
was shocked by the "astronomical" levels of benzene compounds recorded
in USGS tests.

Pete Van Metre, another USGS scientist who advises the city on water
quality issues, told the newspaper he cautioned city staff that the
levels upstream, particularly on the hillside creek bed, were higher
than his agency had ever detected anywhere in the country in routine
surveys of waterways. Those levels would be expected "at a
contaminated industrial site," Van Metre said he told them in May
2001."


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
jjp  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 7:36 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: jj...@yahoo.com (jjp)
Date: 20 Jan 2003 16:36:30 -0800
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 7:36 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

"Hammerhead" <bh...@netscape.net> wrote in message <news:3LyW9.89044$DN6.3370599@twister.austin.rr.com>...
> Does this come as a surprise?  

It is a very popular swimming hole in Austin, not to mention that most
Austinites probably considered it safe and relatively clean.

> Galveston waters are the same way.  Not to
> mention, that the pollution coming out of Galveston is killing off marine

Galveston is a whole different story. Galveston has run-off from Texas
City, the Ship Channel, and the Mississippi River (thus the silty
water) to deal with. Plus it's a large port. Quite a different story
than Barton Springs...


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Robert Allison  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 10:10 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Robert Allison <rober...@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:15:02 -0600
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 10:15 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

jjp wrote:

> "Hammerhead" <bh...@netscape.net> wrote in message <news:3LyW9.89044$DN6.3370599@twister.austin.rr.com>...
> > Does this come as a surprise?

> It is a very popular swimming hole in Austin, not to mention that most
> Austinites probably considered it safe and relatively clean.

> > Galveston waters are the same way.  Not to
> > mention, that the pollution coming out of Galveston is killing off marine

> Galveston is a whole different story. Galveston has run-off from Texas
> City, the Ship Channel, and the Mississippi River (thus the silty
> water) to deal with. Plus it's a large port. Quite a different story
> than Barton Springs...

Are you saying that the Mississippi River runs through Galveston?

Robert Allison  
Georgetown, TX


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Strong Eagle  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 10:40 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Strong Eagle <strongea...@motherearth.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 03:38:38 GMT
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 10:38 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

Actually, yes.  Due to the gulf currents, Texas gets all the silt from the Mississippi.  Its not until you get
down to the Corpus Christi area that the water turns green.  Contrast this by going east of the Mississippi...
green water all the way to Florida.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Kelly Younger  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 11:13 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Kelly Younger <kyoun...@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 04:12:10 GMT
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 11:12 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

I was wondering about that too, but I figured "Oh, well...".
--
Kelly Younger

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Gunnut  
View profile  
 More options Jan 20 2003, 11:52 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Gunnut <spammhun...@aol.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:46:47 -0600
Local: Mon, Jan 20 2003 11:46 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
So basically your just repeating the same bull shit that was in the
austin local rag on sunday!    what a waste of your and our time here!

Tell us something new!     crap,  and toxins been Barton's for years!
you people just now waking up?????

gnut!


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Lars Eighner  
View profile  
 More options Jan 21 2003, 3:58 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Lars Eighner <eigh...@io.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:57:44 -0600
Local: Tues, Jan 21 2003 3:57 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
In our last episode,
<e795e9e2.0301201636.2aa94...@posting.google.com>,
the lovely and talented jjp
broadcast on austin.general:

> "Hammerhead" <bh...@netscape.net> wrote in message <news:3LyW9.89044$DN6.3370599@twister.austin.rr.com>...
>> Does this come as a surprise?  
> It is a very popular swimming hole in Austin, not to mention that most
> Austinites probably considered it safe and relatively clean.

         Puts a whole new light on the name Vulcan Gas Co.

--
Lars Eighner -finger for geek code-  eigh...@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/
        War on Terrorism:  Okay, Unleash OUR Extreme Fundamentalists
"... all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in
       their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'"  --Jerry Falwell


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Discussion subject changed to "Galveston & Ole Muddy." by Frank Matthews
Frank Matthews  
View profile  
 More options Jan 21 2003, 1:03 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Frank Matthews <MATTH...@MATH.CL.UH.EDU>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:03:12 GMT
Local: Tues, Jan 21 2003 1:03 pm
Subject: Re: Galveston & Ole Muddy.
The Miss. is a fair way from Galveston.  However the drift from the
mouth affects things for a long way.  And it goes toward Galveston.
Much of the silt in the water off Galveston probably came down the Miss.
  The silty water isn't a problem except for aesthetics.  most of the
toxins are probably local.

Frank Matthews


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Discussion subject changed to "No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)" by jjp
jjp  
View profile  
 More options Jan 21 2003, 2:54 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "jjp" <jj...@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 19:53:33 GMT
Local: Tues, Jan 21 2003 2:53 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Robert Allison <rober...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message

news:3E2CBB36.C56955BC@ix.netcom.com...
> jjp wrote:

> > "Hammerhead" <bh...@netscape.net> wrote in message

<news:3LyW9.89044$DN6.3370599@twister.austin.rr.com>...

> > > Does this come as a surprise?

> > It is a very popular swimming hole in Austin, not to mention that most
> > Austinites probably considered it safe and relatively clean.

> > > Galveston waters are the same way.  Not to
> > > mention, that the pollution coming out of Galveston is killing off
marine

> > Galveston is a whole different story. Galveston has run-off from Texas
> > City, the Ship Channel, and the Mississippi River (thus the silty
> > water) to deal with. Plus it's a large port. Quite a different story
> > than Barton Springs...

> Are you saying that the Mississippi River runs through Galveston?

All of the silt that is dumped out by the Mississippi is carried quite a way
from the mouth of the river.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Monte  
View profile  
 More options Jan 21 2003, 6:31 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: Monte <AnybodyButGeeDu...@in2004.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:30:51 -0000
Local: Tues, Jan 21 2003 6:30 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
"jjp" <jj...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1zhX9.95433$DN6.4189030@twister.austin.rr.com:

Jeezus H Christ, it's the Trinity and San Jacinto rivers that
dump chemical waste into Galveston Bay(and numerous petro
plants on many bayous), NOT the Mississippi.  Hell, the Gulf
current flows EAST along the coast, its FLORIDA that gets any
crap the mighty Missisip spews forth.

Monte


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
jjp  
View profile  
 More options Jan 22 2003, 4:46 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "jjp" <jj...@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:46:36 GMT
Local: Wed, Jan 22 2003 4:46 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
"Monte" <AnybodyButGeeDu...@in2004.com> wrote in message

news:Xns930AB21FA86A4Monte@216.168.3.44...

We weren't referring to chemical waste with the Mississippi, but to silt.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
God Bless Texas  
View profile  
 More options Jan 23 2003, 12:58 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
Followup-To: houston.general
From: God Bless Texas <nowhich.no...@nospam.nowhere.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:56:36 GMT
Local: Thurs, Jan 23 2003 12:56 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Since the Texans scored their last touchdown, jjp saw fit to opine:

And strictly speaking, there's no prevailing current at that point in
the Gulf, just eddies spun off of the current down by Florida.

There *is* a prevailing wind, which does cause the silt and other
nasties to precipitate a little bitty bit more to the west of the delta
than to the east.  Which kinda winds up being straight out, as the
delta sort of swings east at the mouth of the Miss.

The silty water in Galveston Bay isn't from the mighty Miss, though, but
from the shallow shelf extending into the Gulf from there, and the
resultant turbulence.
--
All Chat no Cattle


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
jjp  
View profile  
 More options Jan 23 2003, 2:28 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general
From: "jjp" <jj...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:28:04 GMT
Local: Thurs, Jan 23 2003 2:28 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
"God Bless Texas" <nowhich.no...@nospam.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:o1WX9.3312$iW3.61286@twister.austin.rr.com...

I had just either heard or read that at least some of it was from the
Mississippi.

Anyway, I don't care about the specifics. I just wish we could have beaches
in Texas that were as nice as the Florida panhandle. Now the easiest thing
to do to get to a really nice beach is just hop on a plane for a short ride
to Cancun or Playa. That would really be nice right now... I'm freezing my
butt off. I think this is the coldest it's been in Houston since I moved
here. In Boston we were used to it, but here...


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
JETman  
View profile  
 More options Jan 25 2003, 1:34 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: JETman <jetas...@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:33:43 GMT
Local: Sat, Jan 25 2003 1:33 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

Do you think that the apartment complex, (where very high levels of
contaminants were documented), will have to be torn down?

Ya gotta love the political blame game that is ensuing...

--
Regards,

JT (Residing in Austin, Texas)

Just Tooling Down The Internet Superhighway With my G4.......


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
vonroach  
View profile  
 More options Jan 25 2003, 5:14 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: vonroach <vonro...@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 22:13:26 GMT
Local: Sat, Jan 25 2003 5:13 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:33:43 GMT, JETman <jetas...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Those levels would be expected "at a
>> contaminated industrial site," Van Metre said he told them in May
>> 2001."

Knowing the little secret problem with drugs in Austin, I wonder what `industry'
was responsible for the contamination of the site?  Hopefully a microbiological
survey of the microbes found there can reveal many new pathological species.

>Do you think that the apartment complex, (where very high levels of
>contaminants were documented), will have to be torn down?

Residents can probably accomplish that if left alone a couple of more years.

>Ya gotta love the political blame game that is ensuing...

Why, they are continuously underway in Austin.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Proud Yankee  
View profile  
 More options Jan 29 2003, 10:14 pm
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "Proud Yankee" <sd...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 03:13:26 GMT
Local: Wed, Jan 29 2003 10:13 pm
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)

"HWS" <s...@yeah.ca> wrote in message news:3e2ab4fc.3648870@news.io.com...
> Austin residents: Get ready to pay more in taxes for a BIG lawsuit
> over this... Not to mention clean-up costs. Meanwhile, tell your
> friends not to come near the poison hole.

Recent tests indicate that the pool is safe:
http://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=59615

Sorry, but you'll have to try harder to find a "love canal"
in Austin.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
effi  
View profile  
 More options Feb 1 2003, 5:18 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: "effi" <e...@ev1.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 04:16:03 -0600
Local: Sat, Feb 1 2003 5:16 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
that is worse than pee in their pool

...

read more »


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
deselby  
View profile  
 More options Feb 4 2003, 12:58 am
Newsgroups: houston.general, austin.general
From: fosterspl...@hotmail.com (deselby)
Date: 3 Feb 2003 21:58:34 -0800
Local: Tues, Feb 4 2003 12:58 am
Subject: Re: No more swimming in Barton Springs Pool (Austin's Love Canal)
Relax, pal.
There ain't no poison in Barton Springs.
Rich Oppel over at the Austin American RealEstatesman is trying to run
this little show, but its about to backfire on him.  Just relax, wait
and see.
I grew up along Barton Creek. Best thing for it would be to plow under
the Counry Club Golf Course, seed it and let it grow back. With any
luck, you might get to see the creek clear again. Could cure you of
your jitters.
Your friend,
Bob


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Messages 1 - 25 of 29   Newer >
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »