Interesting article re:Sydney habour water quality

[kraley]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water ... utostart=1

No return of commercial netting looking likely to occur in my lifetime.....

[garyp]

Mixed feelings about that one. Fantastic (for rec fishermen) that commercial fishing will probably not be allowed in the harbour again, but very sad that the Harbour was polluted in the first place

[bazzoo]

I heard this on the early news this morning Ken , i think thats the end basically of our talking fish to eat west of the harbour bridge and i dont think we will see commercial fisherman in there aver again , certainly will improve the main harbour fishing and the Jews and Kings might start coming back west in some numbers so its not really all bad , Ok for me considering i buy my fish anyway as i am a prick of a fisherman

[Southerly]

Not good, building a pesticide factory next to the harbour years ago was not so bright an idea. I ma very sad that it is polluted so, also provides a great argument for those who would ban fishing all together even though in this case the problem was not of any fishermans making.
David

[sbd]

also provides a great argument for those who would ban fishing all together even though in this case the problem was not of any fishermans making.
David

Sadly, this is also how I interpret the subtext in articles such as this - they make the point that the message re not eating fish from west of the bridge is not getting through to those of non English speaking backgrounds, & it's not much of a leap to claim that the lot of us need to be protected from ourselves.

I may secede.

Also concur that those who build poisonous factories in cities & dump the waste in the nearest waterway should be mired in their own ooze.

[Barrabundy]

Unfortunately factories needed water for either cooling or to get feedstock in and product out.

The good thing about it is that Sydney Harbour can be used as an example to show what can happen. I just wonder whether we've really learnt anything....look at the BP oil spill in the US!

The problem is we all still need to consume and don't make the connection between our consumption and the hole in the ground. We all paddle around in kayaks made of oil derived plastics, our fish finder batteries are made in a factory like the Union Carbide one. Each and everyone of use contributes to the problem whether we like to admit it or not. All the massive holes in the ground need a connection to the coast, they need electricity to power them and they need a factory to make the end product.

Where do all our lures, hooks, sinkers end up.....in the environment? I throw the odd rusty hook in the bin but all my lures and sinkers are lost to the environment eventually.....we all play our part in degrading our environment.

Thought provoking post.

[Bertros]

Thanks Ken - a great article.

What would be helpful is a reference source that breaks down what fish are subject to dangerous levels versus safe levels based on their habits. For example, Kings and Bonito which are (i believe) migratory i would assume we can catch and eat in greater proportions than the suggested 150gms per month, while fish like bream and bottom feeders such as flathead would be more prone to such contamination.

Does such a source exist to add some clarity to this?

[Ranger]

What would be helpful is a reference source that breaks down what fish are subject to dangerous levels versus safe levels based on their habits. For example, Kings and Bonito which are (i believe) migratory i would assume we can catch and eat in greater proportions than the suggested 150gms per month, while fish like bream and bottom feeders such as flathead would be more prone to such contamination.

Does such a source exist to add some clarity to this?

NOPE! It's relatively easy to identify contaminants, but ridiculously difficult, if not impossible to quantify them.

[RedPhoenix]

Zapped onto the front page, with a link here for discussion.

Nasty nasty stuff.

Red.

[kraley]

Does such a source exist to add some clarity to this?

There is a table at:
http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/con ... er-seafood

That outlines the different levels found in different species by location.

It also has maximum consumption recs by species.

Species Number of 150 gram serves Amount per month
Prawns 4 per month 600g
Crabs 5 per month 750g
Bream 1 per month 150g
Dusky Flathead 12 per month 1800g
Fan-belly Leatherjacket 24 per month 3600g
Flounder 12 per month 1800g
Kingfish 12 per month 1800g
Luderick 12 per month 1800g
Sand Whiting 8 per month 1200g
Sea Mullet 1 every 3 months 50g
Silver Biddie 1 per month 150g
Silver Trevally 5 per month 750g
Tailor 1 per month 150g
Trumpter Whiting 12 per month 1800g
Yellowtail Scad 8 per month 1200g
Squid 4 per month 600g

[keza]

I know the guy who did the original studies on the harbour fish and he was saying that flathead has surprisingly low levels. He also said that he wouldn't eat a bream from anywhere inside the heads as they travel a lot and you can pretty much guarantee that a bream caught in middle harbour had spent some time up around Homebush.
Squid gain levels pretty quickly so i guess small ones are better. (possibly)

I would have thought flathead and flounder would have been higher in levels as they are on the bottom. I guess it's just diet.
I hope they publicise that leather jackets are the safest to eat. Maybe they could just commercially catch those bastards. (of course there would be a 50,000 tonne kingfish bycatch attached to it)

[Bertros]

There is a table at:
http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/con ... er-seafood

This is tops.. thank you! If i needed ay more reason to target Kings this sumer, this wouyld do the job nicely.

[Occy]

This is going to sound bloody stupid to some, but whilst it's a bummer that we have effectively stuffed up or harbour for generations there is an upside. Closing the harbour to commercial fishing has been incredibly beneficial to the health and diversity of the whole harbour environment. Marine and aquatic life has thrived,as has the other flora and fauna that live in and around the harbour. If we could just keep those incredibly dangerous toxins and poisons from entering the food chain it would be great. But I suspect we will have to wait for mother nature to heal herself, and from what I've been reading she is going to take her time.