December 21, 2006

3 miles from the Rock River? Not quite.

A commenter to a recent post dealing with the Triumph hog processing plant proposed for near Barstow dismissed any concerns about polluting the Rock River and destroying wetlands by sniffing that the plant was "3 miles away" from the river.

This is simply false. I responded that it was less than a mile, and of course, another troll responded to say that I better go out there and measure it to the foot and if it wasn't less than a mile, I myself would be a liar. (How can people be so mush-headed?)

As even a glance at a map shows, the Triumph plant won't be three miles away from the river. It would sit practically on top of wetlands, directly across the road from lakes that drain directly into the Rock, which itself is less than 3/4 of a mile away.

Judge for yourself from this aerial view of the area. Click image to enlarge.
The map scale in the lower left represents 3666ft or about 0.7 of a mile.



Go ahead and look at the map yourself by clicking here.

You can choose between normal road map, an aerial view, or a hybrid of the two. The green marker denotes the southwest corner of the site of the Triumph plant.

Update... our own nutcase "Headusher" emerged from his cave to accuse me of "smearing" and distorting" comments to make my points because the commenter had actually said the plant was 3 miles from the river, not 5. This is the sort of idiotic stuff they make up on a daily basis in some childish effort to manufacture faults with the blog.

So my appologies. The commenter said the plant was going to be THREE MILES from the river, not 5 as I originally reported, when the fact remains that it's less than a mile from the river and only across the road from lakes that drain directly into the river. So the lying commenter was off by only two miles, not 4. Apparently to Headusher, this is a really big distinction. I deeply regret the error.

This inspired Headusher to go on for paragraphs whining that I print "false claim after false claim". Of course, I didn't and haven't and neither he nor anyone else has ever been able to point one out, which tells the real story.

The fact challenged commenter had said that the dump was 5 miles from the river, which is where I got that number. This too, is a ridiculous attempt to turn a blind eye to the plant, as a small town dump 5 miles from a river can't remotely be compared to a vast hog slaughtering plant processing 10,000 hogs a day located practially on top of wetlands and within a stone's throw of the Rock River.

If a handful of cranks want to attack me, fine, but I really, really wish they could do it without having to make stuff up. Judging from their lack of character, I'm proud to have pissed them off so badly. They apparently have nothing to contribute here but trying to knock someone who's doing something they can't control.

Their latest "talking point" is that I take myself too seriously, which is hilarious in light of the fact that anyone that spends half their day writing in crank comments is taking this blog WAY too seriously in my opinion. My problem, if anything, is giving these nit-wits any of my attention at all.

But roaches always are more active in the dark, so I like to shine a little light on them from time to time. It tends to drive them off into the murk.

On that front, I intend to find a way to block their IP addresses so I don't even have to see their drivel to begin with, as suggested by Rich Miller. That should help a lot and hopefully get things back on track.

To those who have no interest in this stupid stuff, I apologize. But I admit that it's beyond frustrating to learn that these so-called "leaders" are such a bunch of dim-witted, childish, lying control freaks. I guess you might say that everyone knows that, and maybe they do, but I guess I was naive.

6 Comments:

At 12/26/2006 10:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hate to tell you TID, your map is still wrong. Both wetland locations and plant locations. FYI for those who care. Me, don't care either way too!

 
At 12/26/2006 11:40 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

I find it pretty odd that you'd state that the map is wrong as to the plant site and wetlands, yet not bother writing a word as to what IS the correct location.

I don't think you know either.

I do know that all media accounts list the site as being on the corner where I've located it on the aerial map.

If that's not correct, then what is? Or as I suspect, do you have no clue at all yourself?

 
At 12/28/2006 5:34 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

Hey, I am going to repeat myself -- the Corps is saying that there are scant few miles of wetlands in the site - which sits quite near the low lying notoriously Wetland attracting Rock River... and I know as I have firsthand experience with that river most of my life...there has to be more than 3 square miles of wetlands on the Triumph site - I don't know how there isn't?

So either the Corps is being bought off or the government redefined "wetlands" for the sake of the developers in our world...which is it Dope?

 
At 12/28/2006 7:24 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Well, if I had to guess, I'd say the state EPA is under incredible pressure to issue business friendly decisions, let's say.

What technically constitutes a "wetland" is unknown, but a simple view of an aerial map shows the many channnels and cuts and undeveloped lowland shown in the picture.

If it's not technically classified as "wetland", then who cares?

The fact, staring you right in the face, is that the Triumph plant will be sitting on land that drains directly into the Rock River.

That doesn't take an environmental scientist to figure out, and how some people still try to argue otherwise, hoping no one actually looks at a map, I find amazing.

 
At 12/29/2006 9:41 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

Dope this is a lot like the stinking deal on the Mississippi River downtown Davenport when the Riverboat wanted to take over the Oneida landing and build a hotel and destroy the shoreline there - where there are environmental concerns....

I forget all the details but when I read the paper about the Corps saying "denied" to the developer and then a few weeks later, it was reviewed and "approved" I just wondered who got greased!

Money talks and BS walks so they say--

 
At 2/22/2007 9:25 PM, Blogger Bethy said...

Seems to have been a while since anyone has added to this discussion. Considering the news of the day, I thought it might be timely to Stir the Kettle, and shine the light on the roaches again! For those of you with brains, that are concerned about the environment and what kind of mess we'll leave behind for our children and grandchildren to clean up, don't lose faith! Triumph and their paid politicians haven't won the war yet, only a minor skirmish. There's a long, and bloody battle ahead. There have been laws broken and this will be addressed in the near future! Speaking as someone who knows the property and area where Triumph wants to build, and has lived in that area my entire life, YES, the site is within less than 3/4 of a mile. Yes the plans Triumph has submitted WILL disturb existing wetlands, whether the Corp wants to admit it or not. Yes, the site will drain directly into the Rock River, and all of the existing residential wells, and probably city water sources for Silvis, Barstow, and Carbon Cliff too. Yes, the "BIG DOGS" are coming, and they're very HUNGRY! Stay tuned, this is going to get very interesting! Thanks and BRAVO to the Dope for understanding and wanting to shed some light to this subject and help educate the unenlightened! Q-CAT you rock, and I am very grateful to you for taking on the polluters and politicians to try to save our rivers, air quality and quality of life! Keep up the good work, all of you! We need you!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home