FIGURE 4.

9 deforestation in tropical madagascar is increasing erosion and causing numorous deep

gullies along the hillsides.

The steam is nearly choked with sediment. The ocean around madagascar is colored blood-red by
the lateritic mud that has been eroded from recently deforested areas.

Photo: ©frans lanting/minden pictures.

The short run. But who will bear the brunt of the suffering? Is possible extinction of the spotted owl
a sufficiently imfortan change in natural ecology to justify putting some loggers out of work? How
should such issues be decided?

Sediment Pollution of streams

Soil erosion contributes heavily to the sediment load of streams. This increased load can increase the
frequency of floods, for two reasons. First, the mud increases the volume of the stream, which
obviously

FIGURE 4.10 A spotted owl.

Owls are cute, but how shoul their value be determined relative to human economic concerns?
generation,

increases the likelihood of overflow. Second, as excess mud is deposited along the sides of the
stream channel, the channel is narrowed, encouraging the water to overflow more often.

The proportion of sediment load contributed by farmed soils is uncertain, but may be 30 to 35
percent ( Figure 4.11 ). This means that 65 to 70 pervent of stream sediment is of natural origin.
When sediment is deposited, it is referred to as silting. Silting is considered a problem only because
humans wish to interfere in some way in the natura cycle.

One of the most obvious problems is the silting of reservoirs. We think of dams as being parmanent,
trouble- free structures, but silting decreases thir use ful life by decades. Dams are constructed for
hydroelectric power generation, or flood control, or to create a reserve of water for public supply.

An increase in steream sediment load resulting from agricultural practices is a water contaminant.
But when a dam is built on the stream, the contaminant.
FIGURE 4.11 An exemple of sediment load contributed by farms.

Sediment accumulation in coon creek, wisconsis between 1853 an 1976. From 1853 until 1904, the
region had a very small population and little disturbance of the soil. Natural processes required 51
years to accumulate about 24 inches ofsediment, an average 0.5 inches/year. Between 1904 and
1930, as the population an number of farms grew, the rate increased to 2 inches/ year( about 58
inches in 26 years). Soil erosion accelerated between 1930 and 1938 to 5 inches/year(40 inches in 8
years). Since 1938, soil conservation measures have decreased the rate to half inch per year that was
typical of the pre- farming rate in the last century. Source: Trible,1981,science,v.214. permission of american association
of the advancement of science

Immediately becomes a pollutant. Few human-made objects are as useless as a sediment- filled
former lake behind a dam.

Other sources of sediment pollution include :

 Urban contruction projects that convert firm ground into loose piles of easily eroded debris
( figure 4.12 ).

 Surface mining ( “strip mining”) that convert hard rock into transportable sediment.

 Off-road vehicles, such as as dune buggies, that destroy fragile, soil-preserving vegetation in
dry areas. ( this is a local, small- scale problem, not of the magnitude of the other sources of
sediment).

SOIL POLLUTION

“ pollution” often seems to dominate the news media. Most pollution problems stem
from industrial processes and the organic compounds they produce as byproducts.
However,some organic compounds are manufactured deliberately because they have a
beneficial effect when added to soils. Unfortunately, these soil additives have harmful
effects as well.

Before we consider the pluses and minuses of these chimicals, we need to be clear about
the meaning of the terms used by media people and scientists in talking and writing
about pollution. Unless we agree
FIGURE 4.12 urbanization and erosion.

Urban construction turning firm ground into loose, easily eroded debris . Photo: mark E,
Gibson/Visuals Unlimited.

On what the words mean,good communication is not possible. Consulting a dictionary

yiels descriptions of pollution such as impure, dirty, harmful, or contaminated. Although
appropriate, such words do not provide a working definition that is useful when studying
the environment.

Contamination Versus Pollution

Consider the words contamination and pollution. Contamination means the

concertration of a substance that is greater than would occur naturally, but the
substance is not necessarily causing harm. For example, your body may be able to
handle a small amount of an artificial substace by decomposing it in your stomach or
digestive system. You are able to tolerate small amounts of this contaminant, wich cause
you nomor ill effect. Many such chemicals are known. Of cource, you body’s tolerance
for contaminant varies with the nature of the substance and with your state of health. All
living organisms tolerate variablity in their surroundings,and without this tolerance they
could not survive in the natural world. Some contamination is inevitable in our industrial
society.

Pollution, on the other hand, means a contaminant that is harmful to an organism. For
example, excessive zinc or copper in water is harmful to some types of fish, but not to
humans. Therefore, an oversuppley of sinz or copper is pollutant to fish but only a
contaminant to humans. The difficulty is that we genera