User:Alex.0221/sandbox

Location and Description:
Lost Man Creek dam is located inside the Redwood Forrest, Humboldt Meridian. 0.8 miles upstream from the confluence of Lost Man Creek with Prairie Creek is where the dam is positioned. The dam measures out to be 24 feet in length and has a width of 75 feet. The dam extends back southwards 100 feet.

History
In 1936 a dam was built in the upper limits of the Lost Man Creek; the dam was rightfully named Upper dam on Lost man Creek. This dam was solely built to provide water to the nearby hatchery; Prairie Creek Fish Hatchery. The Prairie Creek Fish Hatchery was built back in 1927 at the junction of Prairie Creek and Lost Man Creek to stimulate the growth of Cutthroat, Chinook, and Silverside Fish. A 12 inch [wide] pipeline travels 3,000 feet to connect the hatchery and the Upper Dam. 19 years later the Upper Dam was abandoned and left there. Unfortunately, this dam created a barrier for the Chinook Salmon’s migration. The reason for this being that fish need a good flow stream and a dip in the water to gain momentum and hurdle over to the top of the stream; the stream flow that the upper dam provided was very light and there was no dip to help them gain momentum; eventually all the fish got stuck at the bottom of the dam. In 1989 the Redwood National Park decided on removing the dam in all its entirety. Much of the clean up consisted of removing fish ladders, filling the dam with sediment, and filling drying out the pond behind it, which could hold 800 feet of water. Due to flooding from 1971- 1972 much of the pipe line connecting the hatchery and the dam was lost. To take its place the Lower Dam on Lost Man Creek was built. Its only job is to divert water that comes from the Prairie Creek Fish Hatchery. As the upper dam was being removed proposals to remove the lower dam were already in place; but there was fear as to what would happen if it was removed and how quickly. The proposed ideas were to demolish the dam within one season, the second option was to demolish the dam over the course of six seasons. The last two options were taking it apart a slowly remove part of it over one season and leave it as it. These options all had scientific uncertainty most with how the wild life will react and how will sediment inflow effect vegetation. In the end it was left as is because it is still around.

Legal Issues:
National Parks are tasked with keeping and possibly restoring a habitat to a point in time were human had very little in pact on shaping the environment. Since the Redwood Forrest is a national park, there is a controversial debate on whether to remove the dam or not. The legal issues fall upon water right, air rights, and structural design. If the dam were to be removed permits from the Department of Army permit, Department of Fish and Game Stream bed Alteration agreement permit, and a Regional Water Quality Control Board Waste Charge permit. Before any of these can be acquired the National Park must get permission from the State of California and the United States Fish and Wildlife for permission to alter an environment.

DDT: What is it and brief history
Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane is the scientific name for DDT; DDT is a pesticide used until 1973, when it was banned due to its toxicity. Rachel Carson is famous for her warning of the excessive use of this pesticide for agriculture, her warning was first published in a newspaper; but soon was published into a booked called Silent Spring. The reasoning for the warning is, DDT is absorbed into soil as fast as water absorbed into a sponge. It later breaks down into DDE ( Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene), which is what causes the health issues. Once it reaches ground water or surface water it is insoluble. Much of the DDT found in our waters is due to runoff from agriculture or poor conduct of waste management. A power plant located off the coast of Palous Verdes Peninsula would deposit their waste into the ocean from the year 1940- 1980; making them responsible for the DDT in Southern California’s coastal waters. Traces of DDT are still being found in animal tissue; these studies are being conducted within the time frame of 1980- 2013 when controversy struck the coast of Los Angeles.

Plankton:
Wurster, Charles Conducted an experiment which tested the effects DDT had on Photosynthetic Plankton. This study is important because many of the plankton in our oceans provided oxygen for the marine wild life. His data showed that when any amount of DDT is introduced plankton stop their photosynthesis production by 50%.

Sea Lions:
The worst effect of DDT in marine wild life is the sea lions. DDT is stored in the tissue/ fat and can be passed on from generation to generation. In the 1970's sea lions had high levels of DDT in their blubber. In 2002 12 juvenile sea lions off the cost of AÑO Nuevo Island were captured for blood samples. Each of the sea lions caught were very healthy, yet they all contained remnants of DDT. The effect of DDT in the Sea lions are reproductive impairment, immunodeficient, skeletal abnormalities, and endocrine disruption. Luckily, DDT levels in their blood samples were lower in the 2002, than the blood samples blood samples the researchers acquired back in 2001.

Sharks:
When a shark is exposed to DDT it is stored in the liver. Female sharks exposed to DDT will pass on the contamination to her pups. The effect this has on the pups has yet to be determined.

Muscles:
Muscles tissue is also being contaminated by DDT and since they are a species that can easily be monitored the State Water Resources Control Board and the Department of Fish and Game set up a 15-year experiment starting in 1977. Samples of the muscles were collected from 378 locations each year. At the end of the experiment, in 1992, 25% of the original DDT levels had dropped.

Controversy:
An article published in March of 2013, released a statement saying that the DDT in certain location of the coastal regions in California no longer showed any remnants of DDT. This is controversial because Los Angeles had been paying 60 million dollars to clean up 110 tons DDT, for five years. Going into further detail DDT does not break down within the span of 5 years, especially that amount; rather it takes decades. So, in the span of the 5 years 90 percent of the DDT vanished and no scientist was able to give a logical explanation for this. As of 2009 only 14 tons of that DDT remain in the water. The theory scientist posed was that there was a statistical error when running the calculations. But the big question is should money still be put fourth to clean up a bigger sum. The biggest fear scientist have with this issue is if the DDT did disappear, but rather it is diffusing through the ocean waters contaminating more locations around the globe.