: PCB's in Alaskan lakes
09-18-2003, 12:29 AM
Saw an article in our local newpaper (Skagit Valley Herald) today on sockeye bringing PCB pollution from the Pacific into remote Alaskan lakes. There have been several remote lakes that have been found to have some rather high levels of PCB's and the only explanation is the sockeye have been bringing them in from the Pacific on their spawning runs and then the PCB's are being deposited in the lake bottoms as they die and decompose.
It makes me wonder how many of the sockeye that are sold each year from the lucrative commercial sockeye fishery are tainted with PCB's. I also wonder what the recommended maximum sockeye consumption should be to avoid ingesting too much PCB.
Definitely food for thought.
09-18-2003, 02:32 AM
How many of the sockeye that are sold each year from the lucrative commercial sockeye fishery are tainted with PCB's?
All of them! The usual ocean water contains about 0.5 micrograms of PCB's per pound and this accumulates in the sockeye as they feed and grow. The meat of the average sockeye contains around 20 micrograms of PCB's per pound, mostly concentrated in the fat. Maybe one should eat salmon skinless like many health conscious folks do with chicken.
What concentration of PCB's would you guess might be found in chicken?
How about in butter or enchiladas?
For perspective - If the concentration PCB's was similarly duplicated with LSD, one of the most potent psychoactive substances known, a street dose would be about 25 pounds of fish eaten at single sitting.
Me thinks that mercury might be a bigger concern. I recommend that you abstain from fish altogether. Learn to subsist on tofu and nuts and leave the sockeye for those of us who appreciate their healthier aspects. :chuckle:
09-19-2003, 09:13 AM
Gee Plunk, are things slow over on Gamefishin.com or did the pink run slow down? You seem to be spending a lot of time here trolling for fly fishermen. Any good takers yet?
Since nature is the ultimate recycler, and although PCB use has been stopped years ago, it will keep cycling thru the food chain of which we are part.
But the good news is, we are a bit eccentric in that we create substances that don't go away and mess things up and bury ourselves in ritualistic containers. So I propose we enact a new global law that all humans must be buried in eternally leak-proof containers and be encouraged to eat as much contaminated food as possible to remedy the problem! :devil: ;) ;)
09-22-2003, 12:45 AM
Trolling Kerry? Am I not permitted to elaborate upon a possible misdirection of focus? But yes, the pinks are boring when one spends 5 minutes fishing and 55 minutes playing them in a typical hour. It becomes easy to regard the pinks as pollutant amongst the rarer more desirable co ho's.
An interesting proposition Juro.
But why waste that neopollutrient biomass?
Lets fast forward from 1973 to the future...
The year is 2022 and Earth is over-populated. The once plentiful farmland is one of the many victims of a dying environment. Real food is expensive and hard to come by and the populace is restless and fed up with hungry stomachs. A single raw steak is more valuable than gold.
Here enters Soylent Green...
A synthetic nutritional chip made from the oceanic kelpy goodness? :eek: :D
09-22-2003, 02:24 PM
You can elaborate on anything you want and call it what ever you want. The point here is, this is a fly fishing site with what I will call liberal tendencies for lack of a better way to put it. It is fairly well known around here that you are not a fly fisherman with what I call liberal tendencies. So, when I see you posting on here what some might consider an inflammatory position or maybe better stated as purposeful opposition I tend to think you are trolling.
I might as well sprout off on this as I've thought about it for a while.
I don't have much problem with you dragging your cowbells through here once in a while. I've went back and read everything I could find posted under your name. Some of the early stuff was pretty good but lately everything you write seems to start off in a confrontational and negative manner. Why is that?
09-24-2003, 01:30 PM
Kerry - Did I miss the rule defining this as a liberal political forum? Is entry restricted to those with expensive spey rods or does the fact that I tied fly's commercially during the mid though latter 50's and demonstrated the methodology on television on occasion qualify my participation?
In the words of the master:
"Let's not get into offensive impositions or thin-skinned retorts in this community. We have a unique environment here, like a pristine mountain lake or drinking water stream, with some occasional siltiness here and there but otherwise crystal clear. If you have to piss, walk 100 feet away from shore first please."
MJC - "Why is that?" Sometimes expectation can become a vehicle of suggestion serving to polarize perception. We are all somewhat prone towards finding what we look for.
It is true that in a moment of haste tainted with hurt from the snubbing that you, Russ and Steven presented in the "Skagit blown badly" thread, for replying to the original subject, I did subsequently quip a slurring response in the "This just in..." thread. For that I apologize.
I would suggest that considering the degree of personal attacks and stereotyping encountered here that I and most others have done well at avoiding confrontations and negativity and that I, and hopefully most others, will endeavor to continue to do so.
I often seek to broaden the perspective of limited viewpoints but do so without malice.
You will get used to my posting style in time.
So now may we get back to our regularly scheduled program… fishing…?
Or, in this case, the environment and PCB's.
09-24-2003, 02:18 PM
You seemed to have missed the part where I said "for lack of a better way to put it" and where I said "what I call liberal tendencies". Those were my opinions of this board's makeup not a rule that the founders of this board set forth.
If you go back to the “Skagit blown badly” thread you will see that I defended and thanked you in your posting of pertinent information on the reasons the Skagit was in such poor shape. I don’t believe at any time I “snubbed” you.
I think it is great you used to tie flies. But, I don't think you tie now nor do I think you fly fish. Not that I think you must to participate but that is not for me to say. I will say I truly believe you frequent this board not for the benefit of the board or the other anglers here but to engage in controversial conversation and if needed you will create the controversy.
"Me thinks that mercury might be a bigger concern. I recommend that you abstain from fish altogether. Learn to subsist on tofu and nuts and leave the sockeye for those of us who appreciate their healthier aspects. "
The above is a quote from one of your posts in this thread in case you missed it. This, to me, smacks of a troll. No, actually, to me it is a troll. I think you made this statement purely to see if someone would take your bait. Perhaps I am mistaken. At any rate, I doubt you can convince me that you had any other motive.
Mean Mr Mustard
09-24-2003, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by Plunker
You will get used to my posting style in time.
Why don't you just go back to snaggers.com, where you surely belong, and quit trolling this site?
Lets keep this above the belt. Personal attacks are a no no on this site.
This is twice in the last day and we just cannot have it.
Yes Plunkers statements are a tad inflammatory(he did apologize for his one personal attack) but as long as it is not a personal attack we should keep are responses civil. We should strive to respect everyones viewpoint. No one is forcing everyone to agree.
Not taking sides but the crap going on as of late here has to stop. Now. That goes for everyone.
Mean Mr Mustard
09-24-2003, 03:07 PM
If it means leaving this site for good or sticking my head in the sand like most of you, then I'll gladly leave. To not defend oneself and one's belief is cowardly and I'll have no part in such.
Thank you Plunker for your above response. I will only speak for myself and I have not found your voice hear to be negative in anyway. As you are well aware most here are somewhat liberal. But I am amazed that there are some conseratives here as well. I for one am not liberal or conserative but a good old fashion leftist one who believes in socialisim, not a pinko commie though. Oh how I wish for a goverment somewhere between Canada and Sweeden.
Your challenge to us here is insightful, your views on C&R delightful, though there is a need for C&R in certain situations and even you practice it under the right conditions. Don't worry things will go full circle and some of your thoughts and ideas such as not fishing C&R on depleted stocks will be the norm in the future. C&R has been a disaster in Montana on such rivers as the Madison and Missourri. It was created not for the fish and the enviroment but to be able to justify more fishermen for more money for the industry. Yes we got more fish per mile but we also got a lot of ugly fish that were no longer full of that wild life that a wild trout should have. We also got the crowds and the industry got their money.
Your views on land rights scare the hell out of me but having once owned a ranch in Montana I know how trying it can be to let the public on to hunt and fish. But the goverment must step in on enviro issues and set a course that will help gain some positive results. I wish they would spend money helping farmers and ranchers solve the problems they face instead of letting them fall flat on their face. All that money on war, boy could of that been used on the farm front like the Skagit dairy farmers with their land use problems.
Anyway your views are different from most of us here and I don't agree with most of what you say but from the other side you put up an outstanding debate one that should make everyone of us think a little bit deeper than we sometimes do. At least we should use it to see how your side thinks about the same issues we are thinking about. Your reasoning sure beats the Rush Linbbouh or what ever that idiots name is.
MMM and MJC are good friends of mine, maybe not after I post this. I think they are wrong in giving you the type of shat they are giving you. If they got different ideas on stuff here they should state it and they better be as sure on their opinions as you are on your convictions. Sounds like they are a bit intiminated and a few others are too. I'm not going to say that a the fly fishermen here on flytalk have their head up you know where because everyone of them that I know I have respect for. They are fine people who care about the issues we talk about. But so many fly fishermen in this world today are quick to condem and spew a bunch of you know what at those who don't follow the religion. You know sort of like those who spew the far right religious stuff or those hard core religious zelots in the near east.
As far as I'm concerned you are a welcome voice hear even though I think you are a kook.
I do not want anyone to leave the site. I just feel one can defend there own views without attacking them personally (unless you are a politician:D ).
This is the last I will say about this and I do hope you stick around. I am just asking for everyone and keep things as civil as possible.
If our friendship is riding on whatever you post on this board then in my opinion it is not much of a friendship. I consider this discourse we have here to be the same if we were sitting in front of the shop and having these discussions face to face. I definately don't agree with all your views but you will always be welcome at my place. Plunker to for that matter. I don't feel I snubbed Plunker in the slightest but that is water under the bridge. I hope he does keep on dragging his cowbells through here whenever he chooses. As for his views on private property rights, from what little I know of them I couldn't agree with him more. Take care, MJC
09-24-2003, 11:06 PM
I for one enjoy hearing from you herein. Although I am exclusively a fly fisherman by choice, I have no problem with sharing the river with folks who do not fly fish.
I am also rather conservative (not Republican) and would like to see less government in most things.
I have always found you responses to be passionate, informative, and void of personal attacks.
09-25-2003, 12:17 AM
Keep it up plunker. Your posts are a lot more interesting and thought provoking than all the usual clamoring over the next greatest fly line or spey rod that makes last years greatest fly line or spey rod so outdated.
As far as defending oneself goes, don't you have to be assualted first? Or, if not, is that what they call a pre-emptive defense? Kinda like the best defense being a good offense?
09-25-2003, 09:11 AM
For those who don't know, I know Plunker from outside of the board and we have had a conversation or two while standing on the river bank. I respect his views and enjoy debating with him although I know he is better at debate then I. For that matter, most are.
I may have taken this thread a little to far in my zeal to engage my friend Plunker in conversation. I do enjoy poking at you Plunk and I think you like to get my goat on occasion. But, if I have stepped over the line a bit here, I apologize to all and in particular Plunker.
10-17-2003, 11:49 AM
Yall might be intersted in this bit of trivia. The U.S. EPA Region III publishes a data base of risk based concentrations (RBC's) for most recognised priority pollutants one of them being PCB. [URL=http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/index.htm] RBC for PCB (Aroclor 1260) in fish is 0.0016 mg/kg or parts per million as a carcinogen. Not a really low number but prety low which means that you probably shoudnt eat PCB contaminated fish if you want to live forever. But then we all gotta die sometime.
The oher thing, I believe Soylent Green was made out of recycled human bodies.