Recommended Posts

NEW YORK ? A wayward dolphin that swam into a polluted canal on Friday died before high tide, marine experts said.

The deep-freeze weather hadn't seemed to faze the dolphin as it splashed around in the Gowanus Canal, which runs 1.5 miles through a narrow industrial zone near some of Brooklyn's wealthiest neighborhoods.

Marine experts had hoped high tide, beginning around 7:10 p.m., would help the dolphin leave the canal safely. But the dolphin was confirmed dead shortly before then, said the Riverhead Foundation for Marine Research and Preservation, which didn't know how it died.

Earlier, with the dolphin splashing around in the filthy water, bundled-up onlookers took cellphone photos, and a news helicopter hovered overhead.

The dolphin, which appeared to be about 7 feet long, surfaced periodically and shook black gunk from its snout in the polluted water.

The New York Police Department had said marine experts with the Riverhead Foundation had planned to help the dolphin on Saturday morning if it didn't get out of the canal during high tide. The foundation, based in Riverhead, on eastern Long Island, specializes in cases involving whales, dolphins, seals and sea turtles.

The filthy canal was named a Superfund site in 2010, meaning the government can force polluters to pay for its restoration. For more than a century before, coal yards, chemical factories and fuel refineries on the canal's banks discharged everything from tar to purple ink into the water, earning it the local nickname The Lavender Lake for its unnatural hue.

The dolphin likely entered the canal from the Atlantic Ocean through the Lower and Upper New York Bays and into the Gowanus Bay, which leads to the canal. It's about 20 miles from the canal to open ocean.

more

post-37120-0-51906100-1359163011.jpg

They arent allowed, its a by product of decades of dumping which is now illegal.

So why hasn't anything been done about it? If businesses are responsible then they should be fined to pay for the clean-up operation; if those businesses are no longer operating then the local or federal government should be responsible for cleaning it up. The article says the canal was made a Superfund site three years ago?meaning that polluters can be held responsible for cleaning it up?yet clearly not enough has been done since. It's scandalous that such an environmental hazard hasn't been tackled, especially when the damage caused by such pollution has been known for decades.

  • Like 2

So why hasn't anything been done about it? If businesses are responsible then they should be fined to pay for the clean-up operation; if those businesses are no longer operating then the local or federal government should be responsible for cleaning it up. The article says the canal was made a Superfund site three years ago?meaning that polluters can be held responsible for cleaning it up?yet clearly not enough has been done since. It's scandalous that such an environmental hazard hasn't been tackled, especially when the damage caused by such pollution has been known for decades.

I agree, it should be cleaned up ASAP.

So why hasn't anything been done about it?

The usual reason: money.

Too many poor people to spend money on to pay for other things.

There are people living on the edge of poverty, cracked roads and bridges, dangerous buildings, and many polluted land areas and waters in the USA.

Too many problems and too little money to pay for everything. Politicians are under pressure, to not raise taxes.

Sad this little fellow had to remind us, with his life. :(

The usual reason: money.

Too many poor people to spend money on to pay for other things.

But the bizarre thing is that the article mentions the canal is very near to some of Brooklyn's wealthiest neighbourhoods - you'd think that some of that wealth could be used to help clear up the area. You'd only need a temporary levy to pay for the clean-up and it would improve the environment for everyone in the area. Or you'd think some of the wealthy landowners could organise a fundraiser, maybe even get some corporate sponsors involved. There are plenty of ways to finance such an operation, both privately and publicly. And as mentioned, the government can force polluters to pay for the clean-up. It doesn't really matter who funds it - the point is there should be mechanisms in place to ensure that it is cleaned-up.

And toxic canals are allowed why exactly?

Where else would scumbag companies dumb their toxic waste? There are only so many forests, and that'd be a bit of a drive.

So why hasn't anything been done about it? If businesses are responsible then they should be fined to pay for the clean-up operation; if those businesses are no longer operating then the local or federal government should be responsible for cleaning it up. The article says the canal was made a Superfund site three years ago?meaning that polluters can be held responsible for cleaning it up?yet clearly not enough has been done since. It's scandalous that such an environmental hazard hasn't been tackled, especially when the damage caused by such pollution has been known for decades.

Use tax money to provide a service to the public, increasing people's health and their pride in their community? That's socialism, brah, can't have that. Leave it as a toxic reminder about how you love freedom and hate socialism. And love guns. Or something.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • I've been on Deezer for over a decade, but glad that Tidal joined them in fighting AI slop. Can't stand such takes as Spotify's: "Spotify's CEO recently pushed back against listeners who call AI music "slop," urging people to stop using the term and instead embrace the creative potential of AI music."
    • “Could” … in the IS the healthcare is run by insurance companies that make indecent profits denying basic treatments to people that are paying money for nothing. Besides, where are all the Trump epigones who were stating that the tariffs were going to paid by foreign companies and not the US citizens? …
    • Microsoft Teams gets smarter at spotting sneaky meeting bots by Usama Jawad Microsoft Teams is set to receive a couple of new features soon, including a dedicated Recap app and a rather controversial location tracking functionality. The Redmond tech giant has also explained how it has made online communication and collaboration a lot more performant this year. Now, the company has detailed more secure bot admission mechanisms, as first reported by us in March 2026, and now available in Teams. As the use of AI has expanded across enterprise environments, Microsoft has begun allowing users to integrate bots into their meetings for various tasks, such as note-taking. While this has a tangible productivity benefit for users, Microsoft has highlighted how misconfiguration has allowed bots to join meetings that they shouldn't. This has created security and privacy risks, which Microsoft is now combating using a new Teams admin policy that allows organizers to control how external bots access meetings. Admins can leverage a policy called Manage external bots and their access to meetings. The default configuration is "When detected, require approval before joining", which places detected bots in a lobby before they are explicitly admitted into the meeting. The other option disables the experience. Microsoft has also requested admins to only allow organizers and co-organizers to manage access to a meeting, so that other people don't randomly allow bots into meetings. Teams will now be able to leverage infrastructure signals to intelligently detect and distinguish between bots and humans. Microsoft will soon also trial a registration experience for independent software vendors (ISVs) to build a system that registers a bot with Microsoft, so it is marked as a "known" bot. Teams will also categorize bots as trusted and suspected threats so that organizers can quickly identify which bots they want to allow into a meeting. Additional safeguards to block accidental admission of a bot into a meeting include: No one-click Admit option for identified bots Confirmation prompts when admitting participants that include bots Warnings when organizers choose Admit all, and bots are included Microsoft has begun rolling out this experience, and it will be retiring the current CAPTCHA verification implementation. In the future, the company plans to roll out new capabilities like allow-lists, organization-wide policies, admin reports, audit logs, and more granular controls.
    • With the current hardware prices Microsoft should lift the restriction. Then if you have the correct TPM then allow you to use X feature, if you don't have the correct TPM then don't but still actually let you run windows. 11. With a disclaimer during install that X features would be unavailable.
    • It's good for recycling of course. But commence inflation of a second hand RAM bubble and price gouging on DDR 4 inventory in 3... 2... 1...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      538
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!