DDT in fish from the Bulgarian region of the Black Sea

In spite of a worldwide reduction in the utilization of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), they are still a problem for the aquatic environment and human health. The Black Sea is still being polluted with persistent chemicals, including OCPs. Aquatic organisms (sprat, scad, bluefish, shad, belted bonito, goby, and black mussel) with different feeding behaviours were sampled on a seasonal basis from the Bulgarian region of the Black Sea, and the concentrations of 13 OCP residues were determined. Although many of the OCPs were not detected in the samples, in all samples 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethane (DDT) was present mainly in the form of its metabolites 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethane (DDD) and 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethylene (DDE). Only about 12% of the total DDT was present as the parent compound pp-DDT, which suggests that it was not being used recently in the region. The total DDT concentrations were generally below 150 μg kg^-1 fresh weight, but higher levels—up to 354 μg kg^-1 fresh weight—were also measured for fish species with a high fat content. Between-species differences were observed, even when the concentrations were presented on a fat-level basis. DDT concentrations did not show any significant changes over the 2-yr sampling period. Fish sampled in the northern areas of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast seemed to contain higher DDT levels than those from the southern areas, suggesting a major (historical) influence of the Danube River. For permanent monitoring purposes, the utility of Black Sea gobies and scad should be considered.     

Sustainability: a Dissent

Abstract:  Broadly conceived and considered in its many usages, sustainability has grave defects as a planning goal, particularly when used by conservationists: it confuses means and ends; it is vague about what is being sustained and who or what is doing the sustaining; it is uninspiring; it is little more than Pinchot-era conservation (and thus ignores the many lessons learned since then); it need not be linked to land, to the land's functioning, or to any ecological science; it need not include a moral component; it is consistent with the view of humans as all-powerful manipulators of the planet; and, in general, it is such a malleable term that its popularity provides only a facade of consensus. When sustainability is defined broadly to include the full range of economic and social aspirations, it poses the particular risk that ecological and biodiversity concerns will be cast aside in favor of more pressing human wants. Given these many defects, the conservation movement should discard the term in favor of a more alluring goal, attentive to nature and its ecological functioning. A sound goal would incorporate and distill the considerable ecological and moral wisdom accumulated since Pinchot's day while giving conservationists the rhetorical tools needed to defend the land against competing pressures. In our view, conservation would be well served by an updated variant of "land health," Aldo Leopold's ecologically grounded goal from the 1940s. Land health as an independent understanding should set the essential terms of how we live and enjoy the earth, providing the framework within which we pursue our many social and economic aims.     

Soil sampling and analysis for volatile organic compounds

Concerns over data quality have raised many questions related to sampling soils for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This paper was prepared in response to some of these questions and concerns expressed by Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs). The following questions are frequently asked:

1. Is there a specific device suggested for sampling soils for VOCs?
2. Are there significant losses of VOCs when transferring a soil sample from a sampling device (e.g., split spoon) into the sample container?
3. What is the best method for getting the sample from the split spoon (or other device) into the sample container?
4. Are there smaller devices such as subcore samplers available for collecting aliquots from the larger core and efficiently transferring the sample into the sample container?
5. Are certain containers better than others for shipping and storing soil samples for VOC analysis?
6. Are there any reliable preservation procedures for reducing VOC losses from soil samples and for extending holding times?

Guidance is provided for selecting the most effective sampling device for collecting samples from soil matrices. The techniques for sample collection, sample handling, containerizing, shipment, and storage described in this paper reduce VOC losses and generally provide more representative samples for volatile organic analyses (VOA) than techniques in current use. For a discussion on the proper use of sampling equipment the reader should refer to other sources (Acker, 1974; U.S. EPA, 1983; U.S. EPA, 1986a). Soil, as referred to in this report, encompasses the mass (surface and subsurface) of unconsolidated mantle of weathered rock and loose material lying above solid rock. Further, a distinction must be made as to what fraction of the unconsolidated material is soil and what fraction is not. The soil component here is defined as all mineral and naturally occurring organic material that is 2 mm or less in size. This is the size normally used to differentiate between soils (consisting of sands, silts, and clays) and gravels. Although numerous sampling situations may be encountered, this paper focuses on three broad categories of sites that might be sampled for VOCs:

1. Open test pit or trench.
2. Surface soils (<5 ft in depth).
3. Subsurface soils (>5 ft in depth).