3CATSAILOR
Well-Known Member
Supposedly the old bridges they keep dumping in our area is supposed to be good for sea life. A simple search as shown below states otherwise. In addtion, years ago, the State told people that they no longer coud use the concrete "O rings" as part of their seawall. So, which is it? Good for the Bay environment or bad? In the search I did, I understand it is disasterous. After a significant time, it gets better. I guess the same could be said for WWII war ships and other old ships that had toxins in it when it sank. Of course nuclear powered ships that sank may be an entire different story.
Supposedly there is a small amount of heavy metals in concrete. Recently there was an article that more and more fish and crabs have been found to have toxins within them. Supposedly this is why there is an advisory to limit the consumption of crabs and fish. OR, the State doesn't want the average John Doe/Jane Doe resident to catch hardly anything so the big corporate companies collect any life they can out of the Bay and sell it to China, Japan, etc. An example of this would be Maryland changing the law years ago from allowing four crab pots off of your pier to two. Cutting it in half!! Not to mention so-called turtle protectors that are supposed to be on all crab pots. EXCEPT for commerical crabbers. You must install turtle protectors on each entrance of your crab pot. Remember, all of the commerical pots are NOT required to have it. I'll have a seperate thread about this later.
The State seems to say one thing about concrete on one hand and something else on the other. I am confused. Which is the truth? Probably just a mix up in communication.
I am all for supporting a good area for marine life to live. But, when it is toxic, short term or long term, there has to be a better alternative. Even if the alternative is simply to leave it alone and don't dump anything in the Bay. Supposedly the State has its usual narative that it is good for the Bay. I would like to see an independent Marine Biologist make that determination. The State seems to go to great length to say how great the old concrete is. But, is it really? Maybe yes. Maybe no.
Is concrete bad for aquatic life?
Concrete is a poor substrate for marine life in terms of biological recruitment, making the biodiversity, habitat size, and ecology along the coast decrease.
The Nice Bridge project has been good for transportation, oysters and reef building. Special thanks to MDTA, and SCM contractors for all their help and stewardship. The reefs will provide both ecological and economic benefits.
Supposedly there is a small amount of heavy metals in concrete. Recently there was an article that more and more fish and crabs have been found to have toxins within them. Supposedly this is why there is an advisory to limit the consumption of crabs and fish. OR, the State doesn't want the average John Doe/Jane Doe resident to catch hardly anything so the big corporate companies collect any life they can out of the Bay and sell it to China, Japan, etc. An example of this would be Maryland changing the law years ago from allowing four crab pots off of your pier to two. Cutting it in half!! Not to mention so-called turtle protectors that are supposed to be on all crab pots. EXCEPT for commerical crabbers. You must install turtle protectors on each entrance of your crab pot. Remember, all of the commerical pots are NOT required to have it. I'll have a seperate thread about this later.
The State seems to say one thing about concrete on one hand and something else on the other. I am confused. Which is the truth? Probably just a mix up in communication.
I am all for supporting a good area for marine life to live. But, when it is toxic, short term or long term, there has to be a better alternative. Even if the alternative is simply to leave it alone and don't dump anything in the Bay. Supposedly the State has its usual narative that it is good for the Bay. I would like to see an independent Marine Biologist make that determination. The State seems to go to great length to say how great the old concrete is. But, is it really? Maybe yes. Maybe no.
Is concrete bad for aquatic life?
Concrete is a poor substrate for marine life in terms of biological recruitment, making the biodiversity, habitat size, and ecology along the coast decrease.
The Nice Bridge project has been good for transportation, oysters and reef building. Special thanks to MDTA, and SCM contractors for all their help and stewardship. The reefs will provide both ecological and economic benefits.
