![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,310
Thanks: 125
Thanked 473 Times in 288 Posts
|
![]()
Thank you, that worked!
After reading it, I have to disagree with the gov. I think it is the responsibility of the state to warn people. It then falls to the individuals to do their research and determine if the risk is acceptable to them. If the state has evidence of a “toxic” bloom and fails to notify the potentially impacted population I believe that puts them at liability for negative impacts that arise. However, I have to agree with his concern for the use of the word “toxic.” It is one of the most overused & often misused words out there. I spent 40 years in the hazardous waste cleanup & disposal business and always had issues with environmentalists use of “toxic” for every chemical they came across. Yes, a lot of the waste we dealt with were dangerous but, I wouldn’t call them toxic unless one consumed a lot more than was humanly possible. Dangerous puts people on warning, toxic scares the crap out of them. Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|