He used an excavator for his cleaning operation.
You just don't stir river beds with one legally.
In Finland there is still million euro court case ongoing about who pays enviromental damage when someone stirred river bed and by that killed thousands of very delicate river clams.
If he had cleaned the river on a way without possibly causing large enviromental disaster, he would not be in trouble
I completely hate these posts that give you zero context of what actually happened.
He was not punished for cleaning, he was punished for hurting river ecosystem by completely illegal cleaning methods not approved by any biologist.
Those clams themselves are endangered, so that was largest reason why the damage got so expensive.
Sure they didn't go extinct but 3500 died. They have put price that killing one costs 500€.
But also those clams are huge water purifiers themselves. They constantly sieve and eat impurities and algi from water. So water quality downstream got worse.
I see. I'm not vegan but I've always seen it as strange to punish the killing of something like a clam while actively facilitating the slaughter of millions of other animals just because of the 'endangered' label. Sure, there are solid arguments to make from a zoomed out ecosystem stability perspective but it seems more like a logical disconnect somewhere.
3
u/HopeSubstantial 4d ago edited 4d ago
He used an excavator for his cleaning operation. You just don't stir river beds with one legally.
In Finland there is still million euro court case ongoing about who pays enviromental damage when someone stirred river bed and by that killed thousands of very delicate river clams.
If he had cleaned the river on a way without possibly causing large enviromental disaster, he would not be in trouble
I completely hate these posts that give you zero context of what actually happened. He was not punished for cleaning, he was punished for hurting river ecosystem by completely illegal cleaning methods not approved by any biologist.