1
   

More than 40% of our lakes are unsuitable . . .

 
 
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 10:06 am
for fishing and swimming.

That is the message that former president of the League of Conservation Voters Deb Callahan delivered when she introduced John Kerry last week.

What do you intend to do about this?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 6,389 • Replies: 126
No top replies

 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 10:40 am
Mostly, what I intend to do is appreciate my fortunate, and not accidental, circumstance of not living in an area where such would be the case. The lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, and springs hereabouts - and there are plenty of all of them; within 10 miles of my house (not counting the ones on my property), you'll find 2 rivers, several streams, more than a dozen lakes and ponds, and several springs, are suitable for drinking, great for swimming, and in general superb for fishing (depending on size, of course).
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 10:44 am
Wish I could say the same. Lake Travis here in Austin has been found to have dangerous levels of Mercury in it Sad

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 11:23 am
timberlandko wrote:
Mostly, what I intend to do is appreciate my fortunate, and not accidental, circumstance of not living in an area where such would be the case. The lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, and springs hereabouts - and there are plenty of all of them; within 10 miles of my house (not counting the ones on my property), you'll find 2 rivers, several streams, more than a dozen lakes and ponds, and several springs, are suitable for drinking, great for swimming, and in general superb for fishing (depending on size, of course).


Perhaps, you're being a weeeeeee bit too much the ostrich, Timber. I hate to be the one to hand you the pin to prick your balloon but, "in my little corner of the world" just don't fly no more.

Quote:


http://dnr.wi.gov/org/aw/air/health/acidrain.htm#C

According to the DNR's Surface Water Resources Data Base, approximately 2 percent of the state's lakes are acidic. An additional 10 percent are "extremely sensitive" to acid rain, 25 percent are "moderately sensitive" and 60 percent are not sensitive. This will remain true only if present patterns of groundwater flow continue. Surveys done in northern parts of Wisconsin, however, where most of the state's lakes are located, show that these areas have an even greater incidence of acidic lakes. A survey done in 1984 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showed that up to 9 percent of lakes in the northeast and north central region were acidic. On the other hand, Wisconsin's streams are not considered to be sensitive to the effects of acid rain.


Health effects
A direct effect of acid deposition on human health results from exposure to acid aerosols inhaled from the surrounding air. Acid aerosols are mixtures of several different pollutants including particles (large and small), strong acids (e.g. sulfuric acid), weak acids and vapors (e.g. nitric acid). Long-term exposure to acid aerosols is known to damage lung tissue and contribute to the development of respiratory diseases such as asthma and chronic bronchitis, especially in children and the elderly.
Acid deposition also has been connected to elevated mercury concentrations in fish and fish-eating wildlife such as the common loon, mink, otter, and eagles. Researchers believe that acidification of bodies of water increases the formation and movement of methylmercury--a toxic form of mercury--into the aquatic food chain. This also endangers the health of people--especially infants and children--who eat fish from affected lakes, as well as the health of fetuses carried by women who eat contaminated fish.

Exposure of humans to mercury may result in damage to the kidneys, brain and central nervous system. It may also cause developmental defects. Recent research indicates that prenatal exposure to mercury concentrations much lower than the current "safe" levels established by the World Health Organization may result in subtle neurological defects in children, such as abnormal reflexes and delayed motor skill development.


0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 12:45 pm
Well, I'll tell ya, JTT, the "elevated acidification", which affects fewer thsan 10% of lakes hereabouts, is pretty much a natural consequence of the subsurface soil conditions - high concentrations of iron, calcium, and other metals and salts. Been that way since the glaciers left - during the last major period of global warming.

Now, in the immediate environs of urbanized areas locally (there are some - not very many, not real big, but some), there is a problem with human-caused polution. A lotta work and expense has been going into solving these problems, despite spirited resistance from affected property owners (most vociferous are the non-resident weekenders who hate the idea of having to equip their lakefront getaways with real sewage systems, and who hate the idea of higher taxes). Right near me are a number of lakes 30' deep or more, and on a calm day, you can see the bottom - and literally shoals of healthy fish.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 04:43 pm
I hope that your little piece of heaven continues long into the future, Timber.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 05:43 pm
I hope so too, JTT - that's why I live out here in the land of unpaved roads and neighbors miles apart. If I wanna go swimming, hunting, fishing, or just romping in the woods with my dogs, I can*. This is farm-and-forrest country, and the township in which I live has barely a couple miles of paving, most of it county-owned-and-maintained. I do have DSL, though Mr. Green



* Weather permitting, of course. Sorta sucks when its -30°F seasoned with 50mph wind gusts, all wrapped in a 2 or 3-foot-thick blanket of blowing, drifting snow. That usually only lasts a few weeks though.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 06:29 pm
Most post glacial terranes have a sandy soil which, without a sizeable calcium /magnesium shell hash, like at the beaches, will have acidic conditions. The natural tannin from trees dissociates and gives rize to increased Hydrogen ion (since ph is a negative log of H ion concentration) we see pHs of 6 and as low as 4.5. Theses are not man made conditions and such streams are not noted to be trout waters. For some damn reason , we use the brown trout as a "canary in the mineshaft" There are many waters where trout cannot live and low Ph is one of em. Yet there are sizable populations of bass, walleye, pike and muskie.
I have my water Encyclopedias here with me in the RV and it has PHs listed for raw waters for 3 cities in Wi and, they aint bad in Madison, Milwaukee, Racine, and Green Bay. (pHs average about 7.7) In the sulfide belt i imagine that Phs are lower though.

I think that while water courses are degraded to some extent by both natural and manmade reasons, i kinda doubt the 40% being significantly polluted. According to the encyclopedia (Van der Leeden et al 1992 IIed)
the biggest contaminant of concern are not organics , but radon and Aluminum Almost 60% of water supplies measured exceed the recommended limits for these two.

Timber, you in a native trout area or a bass walleye, and pike area?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 06:33 pm
See now many of the environmental groups would consider 6.5 as "acid deposition" when its actually a sand or glacial terrain. If theres a lot of Calcium in the soil then phs should be 7 or higher
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 07:24 pm
farmerman wrote:

Timber, you in a native trout area or a bass walleye, and pike area?

Gottem all, FM; couple decent troutstreams nearby (mostly browns and brookies, decent sized, plenty of keepers), and the lakes ... well, if its a Northern gamefish, its here. I prefer panfish - crappies, bluegills, perch - but bass, walleyes, and northerns abound too; getchyer bait, timing, and location right, and limiting out is no problem no matter whatchyer after. Plenty of really out-of-the-way lakes and streams, too - if you ain't local, you ain't likely ever to stumble across 'em.

I really get a kick outta sitting in my beatup old Grumman canoe, tucked away in a reed patch, hauling in fish, watching the city slickers in their $30,000 bass boats thundering from one spot to another all day long, wondering why "they just ain't biting".
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jul, 2006 10:55 pm
timberlandko wrote:
I hope so too, JTT - that's why I live out here in the land of unpaved roads and neighbors miles apart. If I wanna go swimming, hunting, fishing, or just romping in the woods with my dogs, I can*. This is farm-and-forrest country, and the township in which I live has barely a couple miles of paving, most of it county-owned-and-maintained. I do have DSL, though Mr. Green



* Weather permitting, of course. Sorta sucks when its -30°F seasoned with 50mph wind gusts, all wrapped in a 2 or 3-foot-thick blanket of blowing, drifting snow. That usually only lasts a few weeks though.


That's the part I like the most, Timber, the minus stuff! Makes ya realize that you are truly alive. I might even get into a bit 'o fishin' one day. Smile
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 03:57 pm
Actually, the number given -- by the former president of the League of Conservation Voters -- was either 46 or 47%. If she doesn't know, no one does.

And while acidification is dangerous, especially to marine wildlife, I would think that a range of pollutants are to blame.

I remember going to Lake Michigan with a date in 1971 or 72 and finding the sand so oily that its once famous white color was hidden under a layer of black sludge.

Prior to my mother's death in 1985, my parents had to relinquish their dream of retiring to river in the north of Michigan's Lower Peninsula because the realtor told them that they could only eat 5 ounces of fish from the river each week.

My father said how does anyone know 5 ounces are safe and what happens when you eat 5 ounces of fish each week, 52 weeks of the year.

I can not believe that the lakes in Wisconsin are as safe as Timber thinks they are . . . but, as my father might say, "consider the source (the source here being Timberlandko)."

Considering that T is in a farming region and considering how poisonous to the environment contemporary farming practices are, I would assume his lakes are far from pristine. Talk about willing blindness. Beliefs like his are dangerous to the rest of us.

I'm upset about the sort of world we are leaving our children and grandchildren.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:16 pm
Like I said, Ive got the Water Encyclopedia published by Lewes and its peer reviewed and full of water facts.

The difference between containing some measurable contamination and calling a lake polluted is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug. Im sure there are measurable residues of PCBs raining from the atmosphere and(surprisingly--no one has yet proven that PCBs are even mildly dangerous) Sometimes we get into serious "bandwagons" of misinformation and disinformation. While the Leagues of Conservation Voters has a goodness to their hearts, theyve often been proven quite wrong about "environmental doomsdays"

Im not being contrarian, far from it. Shes the only source that has quantitated such numbers (There is 1.9X 10^13 cubic meters of lake water in the US) Id like to review the data that srrived at the conclusions so as to peer review it, rather than accepting someone who used it as a speech grabber which then got picked up by some news line, and then it gets spread around the internet.

I rely on accurate data not newsclips
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:29 pm
But what are you going to do timber when millions of urban dwellers come pouring out of the cities after reading your idyllic descriptions with the idea that "Aah wanna a piece o' theyt maself".

Don't you think it would be wiser to enjoy what you have and keep quiet about it?

WC Fields did say "Never smarten up a chump".
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:33 pm
Ah ain't never met no country boy in mah whole life who was an atheist.
Aah've met plenty who didn't give a jolly heck (new rules I gather) one way or the other but never one who "knew".
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:36 pm
baseless spendi, baseless.
0 Replies
 
paull
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 03:13 pm
Quote:
If she doesn't know, no one does


You mean, if she says 40%, its probably 4%. Do you think these people generate contributions with good news?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 04:47 pm
paull wrote:
Quote:
If she doesn't know, no one does


You mean, if she says 40%, its probably 4%. Do you think these people generate contributions with good news?


That's a fairly immature post. Anyone who lives in an area where there are lakes has probably noticed that no one lives on them anymore or swims in them or fishes. See above for my parents' river story.

BTW, good news is generally a lie.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 04:50 pm
and consistently bad news is usually made-up to assist an agenda..
0 Replies
 
paull
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 04:56 pm
Quote:
BTW, good news is generally a lie.



That is the BEST line of the year. You aren't a half glass empty sort, you are a broken glass fell on my knee and shards pierced my eyeball type.

Loooooooooser
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » More than 40% of our lakes are unsuitable . . .
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/29/2022 at 07:15:55