Don't Eat the Fish or Drink the Water

3:29 p.m. on March 25, 2009 (EDT)
32 reviewer rep
122 forum posts

For those of you who love to catch and eat fish on your wilderness adventures, this article is for you:

Luckily, I think the contaminates are not as much an issue in the wilderness waterways as they are in the city waterways where these tests were conducted.

9:29 p.m. on March 25, 2009 (EDT)
0 reviewer rep
436 forum posts

Wilderness areas can be hit too. A couple years ago testing was done on trout taken out of high country Sierra lakes. Some lakes on the west side showed elevated levels of pesticides. Although no pesticide use was known upstream, it is believed that windborne pesticides from the San Joaquin valley are the source.

12:24 a.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
78 reviewer rep
440 forum posts

Interesting, but the appropriate quote from the article (a paraphrase of one of the scientists interviewed) is this:

A person would have to eat hundreds of thousands of fish dinners to get even a single therapeutic dose

The greater immediate importance is the potential effect of the drugs mentioned on aquatic wildlife continuously exposed at any/all stages of development and reproduction. Much different than a human's occasional bite of fish.

Now, when it comes to drinking water, it may be a different story, since drinking water, even though generally quite satisfactorily treated by municipalities, is seldom if ever cleared of these pharmaceuticals. So I guess if one drinks enough of the wrong water, one could accumulate enough of something(s) or other(s) to possibly cause problems of some sort. Maybe. Then again, you're probably still much more likely to die in an auto accident or from a coronary from too many Big Macs and Domino's death discs.

Nobody gets out of this alive. It's all simply a matter of how one goes, and when. If the details are important, take the necessary precautions. Otherwise, enjoy your lunch. I'm having trout almondine.

1:55 a.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
1,663 reviewer rep
3,956 forum posts

I think this is something we should be concerned about in terms of the damage possible to the ecology of these areas, but you do have to consume a large amount of fish to be at risk in most cases. Although as I mentioned in another thread I have seen signs posted warning people to limit fish intake, or not to eat any at all.

I wonder if a crafty fisherman put those up? Oh well, better safe than sorry.

1:36 p.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
78 reviewer rep
440 forum posts

I wonder if a crafty fisherman put those up?

Oh, I've never known anyone who would stoop so low (cough-cough).... Just ignore that pile of "Posted--No Hunting or Fishing" signs in the back of my Jeep. They belong to a friend. Yeah, a friend, that's it.....

Seriously, though, I gotta say that things like this are disturbing. We've already done so much to distort, disturb, disrupt, and destroy the environment--the only environment we've got--that I'm often pesimistic that we can ever really pull ourselves together and reach a situation that is consistent with long-term sustainability and our continued "development".

I'm reminded of what a physician friend, a specialist in neonatology, once said about his practice of medicine in a field with a terrific number of unknowns: "At any given time, I'm pretty sure that 50% of what I'm doing is wrong. The real problem is that I don't know what 50%."

4:34 p.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
42 reviewer rep
352 forum posts

I'm proud to be of the statistics that will be used in future scientific studies!

Is spending time outdoor eating fresh trout, hiking and drinking spring water really bad for you?

I will gladly sacrifice my body in the name of science to help answer that question! Talk back to me a few decades....

7:02 p.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
4,429 reviewer rep
6,014 forum posts

There was a news story last week about the newly popular sport of fishing in canals, waste water drains, and contaminated streams and rivers. Since the practitioners know to a high degree of certainty that the fish are contaminated, it is strictly catch and release. Apparently, some of the fish grow to be quite large and are fierce fighters. But, along with this, the rate of loss of flies (many hand-tied by the practitioners) is quite high. Seems the tires and other debris in such waterways are in great abundance. At the same time, some people in less-well-off economic circumstances do eat the fish.

9:43 p.m. on March 26, 2009 (EDT)
1,663 reviewer rep
3,956 forum posts

Interesting, I have a collection of "rescue flies" I have retrieved from streams, left behind for one reason or another. I have also tied several flies while backpacking with hair from my multi colored dog and caught fish with them, ministercreek would like that, no big names there!

I love to wade fish but I like cold clean water in pristine areas, no trash please. Leave no fly behind! (or anything else if at all possible)

9:15 a.m. on March 27, 2009 (EDT)
42 reviewer rep
352 forum posts

Bill's right. I've seen folks in China fish in the nastiest waters you could imagine, and it wasn't for sport! Hard to believe anything was alive in there...but then again i probably ate some of that fish in the next door restaurant, hope it doesn't affect the results of my scientific study!

September 26, 2018
Quick Reply

Please sign in to reply

More Topics
This forum: Older: North Pole explorers finally get vital supplies Newer: The importance of nighttime navigation
All forums: Older: Timberland Abington - Hiker? Newer: Useful or just marketing?