• TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 year ago

    In the US these are done state by state with little consistency. The rivers and streams here in KS are all muddy and graded accordingly. But when they cross into MO they are suddenly pristine.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re US states, I’m sure if you really wanted to know which specific ones they are, you can look them up, and if you don’t want to, OP’s point doesn’t actually rely on you knowing that they’re Kansas and Missouri.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Like they said, it doesn’t really matter if you look them up or not. Either you know what they meant or knowing won’t effect you in any way. Knowing which states those are does not really effect the understanding of the comment, that different regulations lead to different outcomes.

            • rodolfo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              since the general meaning of the post is trivial, which you tried to sum up with this

              different regulations lead to different outcomes

              all that remains that could be barely interesting are the names of those states.

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It may be trivial, but we have to prove trivial statements often. Some people might claim regulations don’t protect the waterways and only harm businesses. They’d be wrong, but it’s still important to give counter-examples to them.

                • rodolfo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  god I’m talking about something completely different 😂😂😂 why did you move all of this to the article’s content? I swear, you answered so fast, it makes me think I’m writing to ai generated content. it may well be, since i wow post and not comment in my c9mment. il leave these like this just to see what happens

          • jonne@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Haha, can’t believe I ended up with negative karma for the comment. I guess most Europeans feel very strongly about this.

      • lulztard@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Let’s make this about 'murica. Hello, fellow 'murican. Did you already coup a government on this fine day to replace their President with some dictator that will gladly sell out his country to our interests in favour of power? I love the smell of terrorism in the morning. Makes my petro dollar extra bloody.

      • pfannkuchen_gesicht
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        it’s fairly obvious from the context

        EDIT: lol, this discussion is insane. So many downvotes haha, what a bunch of weirdos on lemmy.

          • pfannkuchen_gesicht
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            because the very first sentence speaks of US states, so those acronyms must be for state names?

              • pfannkuchen_gesicht
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                ok. Seems fairly common across the world. In germany it’s common-place as well to use acronyms, sometimes even in speech (mostly for those with longer names like BW for Baden-Württemberg)

                • lulztard@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I have yet to meet someone who says BW. Maybe your social bubble doesn’t encompass the entire nation.

                • geissi@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I have never heard anyone refer to BaWü as BW in speech.
                  The only Bundesland I have ever encountered that is NRW.

                • Don_alForno@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Though most wouldn’t do that in an international sub with an audience that obviously won’t know the acronyms.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The rivers and streams here in KS are all muddy and graded accordingly. But when they cross into MO they are suddenly pristine.

      The paragon was a concrete-walled canal, entirely devoid of life.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    While in the EU, England was covered by the water framework directive (WFD), which meant a national chemical and ecological survey of rivers was conducted annually.

    Activists say this may make it harder to compare the state of the country’s rivers against those in the EU, and will leave the public in the dark over pollution from sewage and agriculture.

    To now not have a full assessment in 2022 and have to wait to 2025 … simply sows confusion and leaves the public in the dark when it comes to properly understanding whether our rivers are getting better or worse.”

    Government officials told the stakeholder meeting that in 2022 only a limited number of water bodies were assessed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and budget cuts.

    The Liberal Democrats’ environment spokesperson, Tim Farron, said: “Instead of clamping down on sewage dumping, ministers have let water companies off the hook and scaled back assessments so we could know exactly how much damage has been done.

    That means abolishing Ofwat and setting up a new regulator with real teeth and ensuring that testing is carried out regularly so we can get a full picture of the damage being done to our countryside.”


    The original article contains 802 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!