ash spill headed to Buggs

**bhgammon** · 02-28-2014, 08:15 AM

At the age of 73, I probably should keep my mouth shut and just let it pass that my post was interpreted as politicizing. However, after going back and reading what I posted, and looking at my wording, and the intended thought that I was trying to convey to Gene, I want to clarify that I was trying to answer his comment concerning his perception that “everyone in the know seems to be silent”. Assuming that the “everyone in the know” means the entities that have primary responsibility for whatever conditions, and events led up to the spill have been tight-lipped. My comment was only comparing the lack of information being typical of how similar matters are often handled by powerful entities these days.

In respect for this forum, I purposely was careful not to address, political parties, or individuals, and there is the fine line that, regrettably, I seem to have unintentionally crossed.

I admit that, like many of us that treasure our natural resources, I am greatly disturbed by this terrible spill and some of the frustrating shoddy reporting that followed. It seems that today’s journalists have a hard time getting the facts straight before reporting them. I have spent much time digging through all the reports that I could locate and I still have more questions than answers.

My interest is not an agenda of politics, but rather the pursuit of the purpose of this forum, which I believe to be the intelligent use of a natural resource and the passing of information that will preserve, and enhance this resource for the future responsible enjoyment of the public. The misuse of this resource, be it abuse by fishermen, or any action by other parties rubs against the grain of what I and all C.C members should stand for if we expect to pass the pleasure of fishing on to future generations.

I sincerely apologize for the post and I intend to be more careful in future postings.

Respectfully,
B-

**fishdoc** · 02-28-2014, 08:35 AM

from all that I've read on the subject, it may indeed be yrs before the consumption of the fish becomes a health problem, if at all. I just read that the biologists testin the fish in the Dan its self will be filletin an skinnin the fish before testin for consumption purposes. I was informed several yrs ago by an EPA representative that filletin an skinnin fish took most all the toxins out of the fish. they say they will also test whole fish to see if consumption by other wild life will be affected. hopefully, we will know the results of these tests soon.

**bhgammon** · 03-01-2014, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by fishdoc

from all that I've read on the subject, it may indeed be yrs before the consumption of the fish becomes a health problem, if at all. I just read that the biologists testin the fish in the Dan its self will be filletin an skinnin the fish before testin for consumption purposes. I was informed several yrs ago by an EPA representative that filletin an skinnin fish took most all the toxins out of the fish. they say they will also test whole fish to see if consumption by other wild life will be affected. hopefully, we will know the results of these tests soon.

This is an interesting article that addresses coal ash toxins. B-

http://www.psr.org/environment-and-h...d-leaking.html

**speKzilla** · 03-01-2014, 01:50 PM

Many questions, for instance how will contaminants travel through the food chain? As this site is mostly about crappie, crappie while not the top of the chain are predatory fish, contaminants have a tendency to concentrate as bigger fish feed on smaller fish. Next while the toxins in contaminated fish in and of themselves may be below the danger point one should consider that consumption of these heavy metals is in addition to the toxins already being consumed, at what point this can become a health issue is hard to say.

**bhgammon** · 03-02-2014, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by speKzilla

Many questions, for instance how will contaminants travel through the food chain? As this site is mostly about crappie, crappie while not the top of the chain are predatory fish, contaminants have a tendency to concentrate as bigger fish feed on smaller fish. Next while the toxins in contaminated fish in and of themselves may be below the danger point one should consider that consumption of these heavy metals is in addition to the toxins already being consumed, at what point this can become a health issue is hard to say.

You're absolutely correct. I have a relative that is now in a nursing home, totally mentally wasted. He was diagnosed with overexposure to lead, and mercury that has undermined his memory and debased his behavior. Several medical procedures have been used to try to flush out the metals but it was too late to reverse the effects. His overexposure came from his occupation, they say, but who knows what part could have been acquired from other sources, such as the cumulative effect of contaminated foods, that possibly may have been the tipping point leading to where his is now. - - - - Food for thought - - no pun intended.

**speKzilla** · 03-02-2014, 08:22 AM

For those who read Sunday's VA Pilot there is an interesting article about the spill (page 2 Hampton Roads Section).

**papadave** · 03-02-2014, 09:03 AM

Is this it speK? -> http://hamptonroads.com/2014/02/viol...coal-ash-spill

**papadave** · 03-05-2014, 07:28 AM

http://www.wral.com/emails-nc-regula...mits/13449600/

**genec** · 03-05-2014, 07:41 AM

the question I have been looking for is not being answered,that is, how is the water and fish in upper part of lake like Clarksville,is it below level or above ?the toxics I am speaking about,how much is in lake now?

**papadave** · 03-05-2014, 08:25 AM

Same here Gene. I'm sure that eventually fish from anywhere in the lake will be affected, but how long will it be before that shows up? I hope there will be routine testing and reporting.

Thread: ash spill headed to Buggs

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions