question for the government

[WayneChristie]

So if the government in their infinite wisdom has decided and proved that fish in this body of water are contaminated with mercury,and consumption of these fish provides a danger to us, why would they have this sign posted instead of one warning of the danger? Incompetence or indifference?
http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy156/rollinghillbilly/March28%202010/DSCF8500.jpg

[tonyflyfish]

incontinence........................

[baitfisher83]

You expect intelligence from the government?

[g1987man]

totally doesnt make sence.... what lake is it BTW?

[WayneChristie]

totally doesnt make sence.... what lake is it BTW?

Its 20 miles from the other lake with the exact same pike regs, the exact same mercury problem, and the same sign . Guess a few deformed children are cheaper than putting up warning signs.
http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy156/rollinghillbilly/March28%202010/DSCF8504.jpg

[dragon]

Guess a few deformed children are cheaper than putting up warning signs.
http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy156/rollinghillbilly/March28%202010/DSCF8504.jpg

There is probably a lot of truth to that. Take Wabamun Lake for example.

Option #1 tell the people its safe to use but run the risk that somewhere down the line someone gets cancer from the water contaminants and somehow can trace it back to Wabamun lake. Probably unlikely as everything causes cancer now a days.

Option #2 Tell the people its unsafe and risk millions of dollars in lawsuits from property owners, commercial fisherman, aboriginals, and everyone else.

It's all about calculated risk. The government does it... car companies do it, the oilsands do it...

[JimPS]

You expect intelligence from the government?

http://i604.photobucket.com/albums/tt127/smudge_01/DeerLights.jpg

Of course.

[tacklerunner]

They will claim it's in the Regulations and their parameters on fish consumption are clearly stated and it is the responsibility of the Angler to read the regulations, guidelines and inform those who are consuming the fish of the possible health risks.

That's how they cover their @ss.

IMO

[Dakota369]

They will claim it's in the Regulations and their parameters on fish consumption are clearly stated and it is the responsibility of the Angler to read the regulations, guidelines and inform those who are consuming the fish of the possible health risks.

That's how they cover their @ss.

IMO

It is clearly stated in the regs, and it is everyone's responsibility to know the regs.........

I don't see the problem here.................:huh:

[DarkAisling]

The commercial mercury fish limit is 0.5 mcg/g. The Northern Pike in PCR do not begin to approach those levels (though the walleye exceed them). The Northern Pike in Twin Valley exceed those levels . . . sometimes quite considerably.

Now, tuna purchased on the shelves of Canadian grocery stores sometimes reaches as high as 0.9 mcg/g. That is almost twice what is allowed on grocery store shelves (0.54 mcg/g to allow for rounding to one unit past the decimal place). It is estimated that 13% of the canned tuna on the shelves exceeds Health Canada's guidelines, and 8% exceeds the maximum allowed on grocery store shelves.

I very seldom eat tuna as a result of the mercury in it. Our little one isn't allowed to have tuna at all. I would allow him to have some PCR pike, providing the numbers stay reasonably low. No one would be served the Twin Valley pike in our house.

So, that being said: one of those lakes does really need to have a noticeable warning put in place.

In case you want to review my numbers:
http://www.health.alberta.ca/documents/Mercury-Fish-S-Alberta-Res-2009.pdf
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/02/19/tuna-testing.html

[italk2u]

It is clearly stated in the regs, and it is everyone's responsibility to know the regs.........

I don't see the problem here.................:huh:
You got it!

[FishBrain]

http://i604.photobucket.com/albums/tt127/smudge_01/DeerLights.jpg

Of course.

His face looks like he was just asked the same question :lol:

[WayneChristie]

It is clearly stated in the regs, and it is everyone's responsibility to know the regs.........

I don't see the problem here.................:huh:

and you just know how that everyone fishing these lakes has and reads the regs? how many people do you see on this forum asking questions because they cant figure out the regs. Or how many natives who dont need a license fish and eat the fish from those lakes? are their kids worth less than anyone elses? Just because someone is not the brightest candle in the basket doesnt mean the government should put their kids at risk. Just my opinion not wanting to insult any board members of course :)

[WayneChristie]

His face looks like he was just asked the same question :lol:

He may have just finished a big feed of Twin Valley Pike :D serve him right

[DarkAisling]

Just because someone is not the brightest candle in the basket doesnt mean the government should put their kids at risk. Just my opinion not wanting to insult any board members of course :)

I'm a pretty bright candle for the most part, and I had no idea that mercury contents of fish were explicitly discussed in the regs. There may be a warning of some sort, but if there isn't any context to the warning I don't see how much good it is.

But then, I'm the type who always wants to know "why?"

[jrs]

The commercial mercury fish limit is 0.5 mcg/g. The Northern Pike in PCR do not begin to approach those levels (though the walleye exceed them). The Northern Pike in Twin Valley exceed those levels . . . sometimes quite considerably.

Now, tuna purchased on the shelves of Canadian grocery stores sometimes reaches as high as 0.9 mcg/g. That is almost twice what is allowed on grocery store shelves (0.54 mcg/g to allow for rounding to one unit past the decimal place). It is estimated that 13% of the canned tuna on the shelves exceeds Health Canada's guidelines, and 8% exceeds the maximum allowed on grocery store shelves.

I very seldom eat tuna as a result of the mercury in it. Our little one isn't allowed to have tuna at all. I would allow him to have some PCR pike, providing the numbers stay reasonably low. No one would be served the Twin Valley pike in our house.

So, that being said: one of those lakes does really need to have a noticeable warning put in place.

In case you want to review my numbers:
http://www.health.alberta.ca/documents/Mercury-Fish-S-Alberta-Res-2009.pdf
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/02/19/tuna-testing.html


Before assuming the pike in PCR are any better than those in Twin read closely and notice the sample size. Not very many pike have been tested, i would not assume the pike are any better based on the little bit of testing they've done. Just something to consider if you're that worried about the mercury. Another tip if you're worried, eat smaller fish. Bigger older fish generally have higher levels of heavy metals as they've been accumulating it longer (bioaccumulation).

[DarkAisling]

Before assuming the pike in PCR are any better than those in Twin read closely and notice the sample size. Not very many pike have been tested, i would not assume the pike are any better based on the little bit of testing they've done.

You are very correct, and I did make note of that when I read it. I included the links to the data I looked at so everyone would have all of the details :)

Just something to consider if you're that worried about the mercury. Another tip if you're worried, eat smaller fish. Bigger older fish generally have higher levels of heavy metals as they've been accumulating it longer (bioaccumulation).

I certainly prefer the smaller fish (for three reasons, only one of which is the accumulation of toxins). The point you've made is a very good one, and there could be many people who don't realize this. That's also the reason why Albacore Tuna is a much greater health/mercury risk.

Size could certainly be one of the reasons for the variation in the mercury contents of the fish in the two reservoirs, and it would have been nice to see what the average size of the fish tested in each reservoir was.

[The Elkster]

I think enzo has a point. I mean there are tonnes of people that are ready to hang the gov't and health care system for whatever is the flavour of the day whilst smoking, drinking and extreme skiing and doing all kinds of risky stuff. I mean come on. If your so worried about your health then take fish samples and pay to have them analyzed yourself and make your OWN limitations to consumption. Since when is it the gov't or anyone else's job to protect you from each and every bad thing. Personal responsibility baby.

[STP]

Hes not worth it fishfinder my friend, you will just get a reprimand for insulting him, your daddy aint a moderator

got any more fishing info

[STP]

wow Enzoid, youve been online for almost an hour

can't say there's no action in your town

[The Elkster]

Can we say caddy...:p

[dragon]

I think enzo has a point. I mean there are tonnes of people that are ready to hang the gov't and health care system for whatever is the flavour of the day whilst smoking, drinking and extreme skiing and doing all kinds of risky stuff. I mean come on. If your so worried about your health then take fish samples and pay to have them analyzed yourself and make your OWN limitations to consumption. Since when is it the gov't or anyone else's job to protect you from each and every bad thing. Personal responsibility baby.

Agreed! as a taxpayer I don't think I should have to fork over money to protect the people who choose not to read the regs. I couldn't imagine what someone who doesn't even fish would say.

As for the natives that fish the lake goes. I'm pretty sure they know about the problem. I would be willing to bet they know more about it than we do.

[Dakota369]

and you just know how that everyone fishing these lakes has and reads the regs? how many people do you see on this forum asking questions because they cant figure out the regs. Or how many natives who dont need a license fish and eat the fish from those lakes? are their kids worth less than anyone elses? Just because someone is not the brightest candle in the basket doesnt mean the government should put their kids at risk. Just my opinion not wanting to insult any board members of course :)

It's everybody's responsibility to read and know the regs, be they over 65 (ie don't need a license to fish) or native....

Should "the government" come to your house and make sure you do a good job of wiping your arse so you don't get a diaper rash too?? :evilgrin:

Maybe you should suggest that more laws and enforcement be put in place cause we all know how we need more government involvement in our daily lives.....

[WayneChristie]

It's everybody's responsibility to read and know the regs, be they over 65 (ie don't need a license to fish) or native....

Should "the government" come to your house and make sure you do a good job of wiping your arse so you don't get a diaper rash too?? :evilgrin:

Maybe you should suggest that more laws and enforcement be put in place cause we all know how we need more government involvement in our daily lives.....

well you know, Id argue your point but I would be accused of insulting you, me and my diapers. so dream on in your happy little world, have a nice day.

[Okotokian]

Oh man.... so you want the government to post or dictate mercury bans? I thought we hate when government tells us what to do? :lol:

Secondly, if they got specific and more open/direct with Mercury info they would have to pinpoint the source. God forbid this government would ever turn the spotlight on a particular company or industry. BAD government! Obviously influenced by some tree-hugging enviro-freaks!

Size and catch limits per lake and some vague "advice" about mercury is as good as we are ever going to get.

[big]

I saw a sign on a pack of cigarettes showing the number of deaths from smoking, yet I saw 3 or 4 people still smoking today. Man, we need signs everywhere.

you have a valid point...

wayne christy you should really take a break from this site. you seem angry all the time

i guess people who post 3000 times are just a bit weird...(no offense)

[Okotokian]

i guess people who post 3000 times are just a bit weird...(no offense)

I resent that remark... rookie! :lol:

[DarkAisling]

you have a valid point...

How on Earth is that a valid point? :rolleye2: What it goes to illustrate is that people still have the freedom to make choices for themselves in our county.

A sign with a warning out at TVR would serve the same purpose: it would educate virtually everyone who came near the lake about the "naturally occurring" (the government's phrase) mercury that has tainted the fish. That would then allow people to choose for themselves, having been made fully aware of the scope of the problem.

And, I still can't find anything in the regs that makes it clear how bad the problem in TVR is. But then, someone suggesting I don't so something usually isn't enough. I want to know "why."

And, as far as the cost goes, I wonder how much it would cost to post a sign and maintain it for 50 years? I wonder if that cost would be less than treating one infant with severe neurological defects that developed as a result of the mother's mercury-tainted-fish consumption?

It really amazes me how "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" seems to escape so many people. We could very well all be paying for it, one way or another. No one is saying anything about a "law" or taking any rights away.

I gotta go have a smoke . . .

[Geezle]

How on Earth is that a valid point? :rolleye2: What it goes to illustrate is that people still have the freedom to make choices for themselves in our county.

A sign with a warning out at TVR would serve the same purpose: it would educate virtually everyone who came near the lake about the "naturally occurring" (the government's phrase) mercury that has tainted the fish. That would then allow people to choose for themselves, having been made fully aware of the scope of the problem.

And, I still can't find anything in the regs that makes it clear how bad the problem in TVR is. But then, someone suggesting I don't so something usually isn't enough. I want to know "why."

And, as far as the cost goes, I wonder how much it would cost to post a sign and maintain it for 50 years? I wonder if that cost would be less than treating one infant with severe neurological defects that developed as a result of the mother's mercury-tainted-fish consumption?

It really amazes me how "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" seems to escape so many people. We could very well all be paying for it, one way or another. No one is saying anything about a "law" or taking any rights away.

I gotta go have a smoke . . .
Well said Shelley.

Big, comparing something like mercury tainted fish to cigarettes...come on now :rolleyes:

We know, and it has been proven that cigs are bad for our health. All of them...not just some of them.

Now compare that to fish, which accumulate 'naturally occurring' mercury...but only in SOME waters in the province...in many places they're still safe. As has already been stated, some people have a hard enough time understanding the regs, or be from outside of the area. Maybe the pike are safe where the person is from, so they assume that all pike are safe, so they just skim over the limits for the body of water they're fishing.

Really, how hard would it be for them to add just one more line to the bottom of those signs to warn of possible mercury problems. Seems to make sense from a liability standpoint, no?

[WayneChristie]

you have a valid point...

wayne christy you should really take a break from this site. you seem angry all the time

i guess people who post 3000 times are just a bit weird...(no offense)

Im not angry, just sick and tired of you "no Offense" trolls who have nothing better to do than troll forums to add useless comments just to get a rise out of people. If you dont have the intelligence to copy my name with the proper spelling then dont use it. I guess your time out didnt help at all from what I see. First post back and right back to insulting me. :)

[Heimdallr]

I understand the people fully and agree with them when they say "It's everyone's responsibility to read the regulations." I especially agree with this in terms of poaching or using bait on water where it is banned. But I think the big thing with this issue is that the government chose to put time and effort into installing a sign that states the limits rather than a sign that posted the very real dangers of keeping fish from those lakes. The problem is the government's priority, not whether or not people should read the regulations.

[jts1]

:lol: really... Man I have woke up Monday morning from a drunking weekend. Walked over to a pizza box thats been sitn there since Fri night , popped that bad boy in microwave and mowed down , then you take your pounding head back to bed. Mind you that was in my misguided youth. I'm much better now But if that dint kill me a fish out of PCR sure as hell ain't going to. I have had more than my share of midnight fish cook ups down there. Now maybe it was the Jamison's killing all the bad stuff but I'm still alive and good looking as ever....

Shut up peanut gallery :tongue2: