Erie walleye and PCB's

[Bob M.]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-08-00 AT 11:34AM (CST)[p]Hi all,

I was just wondering if anyone knew the real answer or a source to get accurate information on just how hazardous eating walleye from Lake Erie is. When I read the regulations from both PA and OH on recommended intake, it doesn't exactly give one the warm fuzzies. So, does anybody really know how hazardous eating walleye from Lake Erie versus a hot dog or a growth hormone fed steak is?

Another item concerning Lake Erie. With the tons of "contaminated" fish leaving Lake Erie every year in coolers and birds washing up on the shore and being carried away by racoons and such, wouldn't it seem reasonable to think that the level of contaminants in the lake are decreasing? For the year 2000, PA changed its restrictions on intake to indicate that the fish are actually more hazardous than last year. I read somewhere a book put out by the Canadian and U.S. Government is now available explaining this in greater detail. Does anyone know where this book is available? I am not asking these questions so somebody can tell me to "just trim off the belly fat and the lateral line" etc... or "I have been eating them for 92 years and have never had a problem". I am looking for comparative data to show exactly how this compares to other foods that are available at our grocery stores. Incidentally, why are there no restrictions on eating perch when there are for walleye, bass, and virtually every other fish in the lake?

If this general question is/was discussed elsewhere, I apologize for the repeat, or if it is explained online somewhere else could someone share the link? Thanks in advance.

[Sunshine]

Bob,
I'm not going to answer your question but I'm actually going to ask another one that piggy backs yours. I hope that you do not mind. I may be making this too broad for you. But when was the last time that you read regs from any state that said that the consumption of walleyes was okay for everyone? Every document that I read states that the fish should not be consumed by my pregnant wife, any of my living children or anyone who thinks that they would have children in the future. Sounds like the only people that walleyes are good for are the single white males out there. Makes you wonder. I added up my fishing licenses from different states last night and so far this year I have 6 and it will continue to grow. I pick up all the regs when I receive my license and always read them. They all warn you. I thinks its called PYAS (the-protect-your-***-syndrome-)

Sorry if I muddied the waters for you, but I feel better now, getting that off my hairy chest. Oh my god, it's glowing ;-)

[FISH4U]

The same walleye in Oh. & PA. that have warnings out are the SAME WALLEYE that people buy everyday at the local grocery store. The only differance is that they are caught in Canadian Waters of Erie.
These fish have NO WARNINGS WHATS SO EVER POSTED AT THE STORE. HOW DOES THIS COMPUTE ???

That also includes store bought but lake Erie caught:
perch
white perch
white bass !!!!!

[FISH4U]

The same walleye in Oh. & PA. that have warnings out are the SAME WALLEYE that people buy everyday at the local grocery store. The only differance is that they are caught in Canadian Waters of Erie.
These fish have NO WARNINGS WHATS SO EVER POSTED AT THE STORE. HOW DOES THIS COMPUTE ???

That also includes store bought but lake Erie caught:
perch
white perch
white bass !!!!!

[crash]

Wouldn't the goverment and the commercial's love it if everybody was too afraid to eat their own catch and went shopping for it instead? hhhmmmmm...

[Bob M.]

I'm with all of you on that. However comparatively speaking, how do walleye stack up when compared to say, for example, beef? I made mention of this on this forum a year or so ago, and someone mentioned that carp being sold commercially have higher levels, and require no health notice at the retail level either.

Obviously, beef produced for retail comsumption must be produced within certan guide lines, i.e., only so much growth hormone, so much antibiotics, etc. etc. these are regulated substances, some if used improperly, carcinogens. Are they not? Dont' get me wrong, I'm not paranoid, I'd just like to see some hard comparative data. If it exists. BTW, thanks for the responses.

[crash]

well the news of late is that beef is alot worst then they thought. Turns out that after years of polutions being poured into the enviroment, the grass that cows eat is heavly poluted with Dioxins and such. Go ahead take a nice big bite of that whopper. So all the problems that people had with Antibiotics and steroids is nothing compared to the stuff in the grass, and your not going to get rid of that easily. Unless the cross a grasshopper and a zebra mussel.

[Frank]

In Ontario there is an annual publication for the public called "The Guide to Eating Ontario Sport Fish". It is available online at www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/guide/. Lake Erie gets testing on a regular basis. Hope this helps.

[Homer]

Your first question is too complicated to answer in the space provided by this forum. I can answer the second question here, though. The amount of PCB contained in fish tissue is such a small drop in the bucket compared to the amount of PCBs in the water that you could take all of the fish out of the lake and not even make a dent in total.

[SUPERTROLLER]

There was a major arguement a couple years ago regarding the health warnings in the Mi. DNR fishing regulations publication. It was regarding the testing procedures used to arrive at these supposedly hazardous levels of consumption. Seems the tests were being run on samples of the WHOLE fish after it had been run through a large mulching/blending machine. Eyes, gills, guts, and scales; the whole enchilada!! After some protesting from sportsmans groups, they did more tests. These tests were run on fillets from different gamefish, as usually consumed. Those tests showed substantially lower levels of toxins. I can't recall who did the testing but think it was Mi. State University. This might also be a reason for the confusion as to what numbers to believe. Lots of different States running tests and probably all doing them a different way or using different methods to measure the same population of fish. Eat,Drink, and be Merry. You'll live longer and live happy.

[steve heckler]

back in the 80's there was a scare on lake michigan fish species warning of dangerous levels of most toxins....the national wildlife federation produced the article....they used data i believe from the mich dnr and the wisc dnr...they did not make their own study....they submitted their paper to the mich dnr which replied they can't say what they were saying based on the mich study....they published their report anyway and received much scare-type publicity....several mos later rebuttals appeared in our local paper by a semi-famous outdoor writer jack parry....also outdoor life published an excellent rebuttal which i clipped out and passed around and then lost it....i went to the library and tried to find that article in back issues and even contacted outdoorlife and can't find it....essentially what the article said is that the toxicity levels are determined via animal testing ....then the govt agency establishes that they will not accept any level which is 50% of that level...ie 10 ppm is toxic... they only accept 5ppm.....so they make the acceptable level safer for us...then they take the entire fish...scales...liver...kidney... fat....intestines....and mash it up and test for individual toxins....remember most toxins are fat soluble...meaning they accumulate in fat not water...muscle is mostly water....the main detox organs are the liver and kidney....so if you stick to fillets and away from the older fish the safety factor is very conservative and you and your own should live a long time....i do watch what my younguns eat...we eat perch ...spring coho ...steelhead....stay away from lakers ...browns...fall run coho...fall kings.... i wish i could find that outdoor life article...steve