The citizens' initiative demands that the remediation of hazardous waste in Gospić begins immediately

Gospić, A citizens' initiative has called for immediate action to clean up hazardous waste at location Bilajska 50 in Gospić, citing recent findings from geotechnical analyses conducted under the order of the State Inspectorate for Environmental Protection (USKOK). According to the initiative “Gospić je naš dom,” the two expert reports, one issued in March and another updated in July 2026, confirm the presence of dangerous levels of contaminants in soil and water surrounding the site. The group demands urgent intervention, including the commencement of cleanup efforts without further delays due to public procurement procedures, continuous monitoring of groundwater and soil, and clarification of responsibility throughout the supply chain. The experts found approximately 37,000 tons of waste at the site, though they noted this does not include all materials, particularly those within the silo building. Much of the waste is buried underground, covering an area of 14,267 square meters with an average depth of three meters. The waste includes remnants of electronic and medical waste, plastics, and processed waste fractions. It is so mixed into the soil that separation is no longer feasible. Ecotoxicity tests using both EU regulations and live organism testing confirmed the presence of hazardous substances. For instance, concentrations of copper were measured at up to 9,946 milligrams per kilogram, which is 100 times higher than allowed limits. Lead reached up to 1,051 milligrams per kilogram, and antimony levels were several hundred times above natural background values. Contamination has been confirmed at least 50 meters beyond the landfill boundary. Between 2017 and 2024, vegetation cover was removed from 17,796 square meters around the site, leading to the drying of trees near its edge. Plants within 200 meters showed traces of antimony, copper, zinc, lead, and cadmium, confirming the transfer of toxins through the food chain. The site is located directly adjacent to protected areas of the European ecological network Natura 2000. Microplastics were also detected, described as a permanent change with no possibility of remediation. In March, experts outlined a pathway through which contamination could reach water sources: cracks in the rock allowing rapid movement of water and a protective clay layer that had become eroded in one spot. At that time, the water quality was still acceptable, and warnings were clear. In February, the group had previously requested urgent action and publication of analysis results during multiple meetings with the Fund for Environmental Protection. However, there was no room for discussion regarding emergency procedures. By July, the update confirmed that contamination had indeed passed through the identified route exactly as predicted. Water downstream of the landfill showed PFAS compounds, known as “forever chemicals” because they do not break down and remain in aquifers for decades. Levels of 200.5 nanograms per liter were recorded, exceeding the EU limit of 100 by double. These compounds were absent upstream but present in both measurement sites downstream. The highest concentration was precisely where the experts in March had indicated the flow would occur. The assessment of risk level is high, with partial irreversible damage already observed, and the likelihood of further deterioration is considered high if the waste remains undisturbed. For over a year and a half, the same statement has been heard: that action is not urgent, that waiting is necessary, and that the correct procedure must be determined first. The initiative now calls for an expedited process without delay or debate over the procurement method. They argue that the law provides ways to act quickly in such situations. The decision on the procedure is administrative and can be made simultaneously with the preparation of waste removal. It should not replace the need for prompt action. They emphasize that it is abnormal for the preparation of a decision to take longer than the time required for contamination to reach water sources. At the same location, in the same case, and at the same time, several separate investigations were either conducted or not, none of which were available to the public. The Institute for Public Health did not receive any request, despite being tasked with protecting human health in such matters. The initiative points out that these analyses were carried out independently of the findings presented.