algae bloom

[wakina]

Maybe this latest algae bloom will get our officials off their sorry asses and get them to work solving this problem. These blooms have been going on for way to long with way to much foot dragging. Now there are a few hundred thousand people without a safe water supply maybe this will get their attention and they will actually start to address the problem with something more than just lip service.

Maybe now we know the reason the fishing has been so spotty this year.

[Justretired]

People asking me if the fish caught now are safe to eat. Haven't found anything about that yet.

[wakina]

People asking me if the fish caught now are safe to eat. Haven't found anything about that yet.

They are warning people to not have any contact what so ever with the water supplied by the city of Toledo. It has been on the local Toledo TV stations all day today. So if the contamination is coming from the lake water how are you going to handle the fish that you catch. How are they not going to be contaminated at least on the outside where you are handling them to remove hooks and to place them into your cooler. Probably the closer you are to the Toledo water intake the more pronounced the problem would be. I know yesterday afternoon there was a mild algae bloom in the area of B-can, it looked like a normal green algae bloom to me but I am no expert on algae blooms other than what they feed on is a by product of pollution in the form of phosphorous and nitrogen. Google Toledo a water problem and read what several sources have to say. It does not sound good to me. The toxins involved can damage your liver among other things.

[wakina]

Apparently they have lifted the do not touch recommendation for healthy adults but have not lifted it for children or people with any type of immune system disorder. Obviously the water is bad and probably much worse than what they are telling the public. The less people know the better they like it. They probably would not be saying anything now if it was not for the serious health risks involved.

This situation brings to mind some of the things that transpired in the early 1960's. It is a wonder they have not closed some of the public beaches. Where are the state officials at on this matter.

On a lighter note it has been said that the latest water test showed an improvement in water purity over the previous tests performed earlier.

[Firetiger]

http://www.toledoblade.com/Medical/2...cials-say.html

[wakina]

http://www.toledoblade.com/Medical/2...cials-say.html

I normally would take what the ODNR had to say and be happy with it, but not this time.

The article headlines to me are at the very least misleading if not downright dishonest. Obviously those headlines are the opinion of the Toledo Blade and were written for whatever reason a journalist writes those things.

The first three paragraphs leaves more questions unanswered than were addressed. 1. When was the last testing done?
2. When was the last time the city of Toledo had a water crisis that was caused by a HAB (hazardous algae bloom), one so bad that they told residents not to use the water because of the high levels of toxins in it?
3. The state ODNR representative Jeff Tyson is speaking about research that took place in the past, the same past that testing of the city of Toledo's water supply indicated it was still safe to drink. He went on to say that there were no detectable levels in the fillets/meat when that testing was done. Just when was that testing done?

Paragraph 4 has some troubling statements in it when compared to the first 3 paragraphs. That is that there are presently more tests being done at the Ohio State University to determine if there is a problem. That tells me they are unsure themselves and are doing this test just to be sure, That is kind of like playing Offence and Defense both at the same time while assuring the public everything is OK with their official statements.

I find the statement about the fishes Liver the most troubling of all! The liver is the last place in the body where a substance(toxins in this case stop) passes through or could also accumulate in the body, they only accumulate there after they have traveled throughout the rest of the body and are headed for the hallway leading to the exit door located on the fishes underside.

[Firetiger]

Another link I found

http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/...18641#msg18641

[wakina]

Another link I found

http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/...18641#msg18641

The very last post in the thread contained in your provided link is the very point I was trying to make! The test results could vary from one day to the next depending if the sample tissues were taken just before a major algae bloom, during the middle of a major algae bloom, just after a major algae bloom or several days after a major algae bloom. An unknown variable, how long the tested fish had been in the affected water containing the algae. The liver would have to have the time needed to filter out those toxins and the higher the toxin levels ingested the longer it would take the liver to filter them out, the liver would only be able to accumulate and retain or eliminate so much of the toxins before slowing down the filtering process.

The species of fish would also have a very large impact on the level of toxicity!
For example we all know how fast a large school of walleyes can vanish within a time span of only a couple of hours, perch takes a little longer if at all, catfish don't move around all that much and would probably remain in the algae infested water until oxygen depletion drove them to better areas of O2 levels. Smallmouth bass would be another example of a fish that would not give up their home territory very fast or willingly. The more nomadic walleyes would probably be the least affected fish of any of those kept by the recreational fishermen as they are the most nomadic of them all.

So for me, the link to the first article you posted left more questions unanswered than were answered. To me, it was designed to sugar coat the facts about how the present algae bloom is affecting the food value and quality of the fish that are presently being caught and reduced to fillets for table fare. Obviously there has never been an algae bloom on the scale of what is currently taking place today, and just as obviously there has never been any testing on the quality or toxic levels of fish taken for consumption during an algae bloom of this magnitude.

I would not question the quality of a fish that was caught a few miles from the high concentration of algae as the dilution of the toxins by the amount of lake water would reduce the levels to below the dangerous levels that are present in the water near the Toledo water intake.

[Fish Tales]

Lake Erie Charter Boat Association has been on the toxic algae issue from the beginning. For the last 3 years a group of Lake Erie Charter Boat Captains from the Maumee Bay to Kelly’s Island have been gathering water samples on a weekly basis, in conjunction with The Ohio State University and the OEPA. Last year we enlarged our scope to include taking walleye tissue samples where we collect the water. This testing was started in the height of last year’s bloom and was reinstituted three weeks ago and the Ohio State University is responsible for analyzing the tissue. There have been no reports of microcystin in the tissue of these fish.


Kevin

[igotgills2]

Wakina raises some very good points about the situation. I'm sure many would like to understand how this keeps occurring and then reliable recommendations to the public based on timely information.

Curious why Ohio State began testing fish again 3 weeks ago if it was related to the Sandusky or Monroe, Mi algae bloom, but no precautions or warnings were issued until this past weekend? When Ohio Sea Grant personnel make statements like this, it causes me to wonder how far down the rabbit hole do we need to go to get the real answer?
"However, fish subjected to high concentrations of algal toxins can have those toxins present in their fillets, at least temporarily (e.g., note this research by Schmidt et al. 2013). The bottom line is if you know algal toxins or a cyanobacterial/blue-green algae bloom to be present, it's probably prudent to be conservative in your choices to harvest and consume fish."

I have concerns with the statements begin made by the authorities, and I am certain that the wording was intentional.

"if the fish is cleaned properly" it "should be safe for consumption"........... "Should"?

"Mother Nature has been waving a big, red flag about this issue for quite a while, and it looks like nobody was watching or paying attention.” Guess they got that one right.