My Facebook pages

Robert Montgomery

Why We Fish

Fish, Frogs, and Fireflies

Pippa's Canine Corner 



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Get Updates! and Search
No RSS feeds have been linked to this section.






Entries in pollution (59)


Environmental Groups Critical Of Missouri Plan To Reduce Pollution

Missouri's proposed regulations to reduce pollution of the state's lakes and reservoirs won't be strong enough to do the job, according to environmental groups.

Both the Missouri Coalition for the Environment (MCE) and the Missouri chapter of the Sierra Club filed comments opposing the state strategy, which does not set numeric limits on nitrogen and phosphorus, the primary nutrients that pollute in the form of agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, and sewage treatment plant discharges.

These nutrients can contribute to algae blooms and fish kills, and their runoff into the Mississippi River watershed feeds a massive "dead zone" around the mouth of the river in the Gulf of Mexico each summer.

“They need to come up with actual numbers to define what’s clean and what’s dirty, and right now they don’t have that,” said Peter Goode, an environmental engineer at Washington University’s Interdisciplinary Environmental Law Clinic. “What they’ve proposed now only protects aquatic life. They need to protect drinking water sources and they need to protect for recreational uses.”

Mostly the plan focuses on measuring and reducing algae blooms and fish kills, as well as other threats to aquatic life caused by excess nutrients.

“We originally were proposing (criteria to protect) both drinking water supply and aquatic life. But through stakeholder discussions, we decided to just focus on aquatic life use,” said John Hoke, chief of the watershed protection section at the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR). “In two-thirds of the state, the aquatic life use actually does protect what we project to be a protective drinking water supply use for the new lake nutrient criteria.”

A settlement reached last year between MCE and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency required that the federal agency propose a plan to address nutrient pollution in Missouri's lakes by Dec. 15, 2017, unless the state came up with its own plan by that date, which it did.

DNR estimates that the coast to implement its plan likely would range between $48 and $83 million, while EPA's option would cost the state $2.4 billion. The state last proposed standards to control nutrient pollution in 2009, but they were rejected by EPA.



Health of James River Continues To Improve

The health of the James River, one of Virginia's most important bass fisheries, continues to improve and is significantly better than a decade ago, according to the latest bi-annual assessment from the James River Association (JRA).

Much of that improvement is attributable to new pollution control, according to JRA's Bill Street. "Since 2005, Virginia has invested over $1.3 billion, which has been matched by local and private dollars to control pollution going into the James River and other waters of the state," he said.

"The vast majority of that money has gone to wastewater treatment upgrades and, as a result, we have attained 118 percent of the needed pollution reductions in wastewater going into the James River."

Based on data collected from government agencies, the river's grade this year is 62 percent, a B-, up slightly from 61 percent in 2015. But the fish and wildlife score improved dramatically, from 56 to 66 percent, while habitat declined from 65 to 61 percent.

"Smallmouth bass, oysters, and bald eagles are all faring well in the river," said the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. "There were no new statistics for striped bass, which is still at about 60 percent of its population goal, according to the report."

On the negative side, underwater grasses started declining in 2016, following considerable growth in 2015.

"We saw tidal water quality improve since then, so we're not quite sure why underwater grasses have dipped," said JRA's Shawn Ralston. "We do know they are susceptible to sediment loads, so that could be one of the reasons."


Why Do Fish Kills Occur? Here's Why 

Pollution or natural events. Which kills more bass and other fish?

Many anglers and waterfront property owners might believe that it is the former. Resource managers tell us that it likely is the latter.

"The biggest public misconception is that any fish kill is because of 'poisons' that got put or spilled in the water," said fisheries biologist Allen Martin with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

"The public thinks pollution when they hear fish kill when 9 times out of 10 it is probably an oxygen-depletion problem," added Gene Gilliland, B.A.S.S. National Conservation Director.    

Joe Love with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources voiced  similar sentiment. "I get the same kind of feedback," he said. "People think that it's wastewater treatment overflows or point source (pollution) that somehow are killing the fish.

"On occasion, the cause of a kill is a spill of some toxic chemical," he continued. "But those are really pretty rare and generally are very localized, such as a pipeline burst or a tank truck overturned, or a faulty valve caused discharge from a factory or sewage treatment plant."

In reality, the "oxygen-depletion problem" mentioned by Gilliland ranks as the worst of nature's mass murderers.


In other words, fish die from lack of oxygen. Major contributing factors include weather and warm water, which can hold less oxygen than cold. Additionally, we sometimes are accomplices through warm-water discharges, flow alterations, and nutrients pouring in from agricultural lands and developed areas.

Fish kills along Florida coasts following discharge of nutrient-rich water from Lake Okeechobee provide prime examples. Sunlight and organics combine to create algal blooms. The blooms die when clouds block the sun for a day or two and their decay burns up oxygen.

"Oxygen depletion is the killing cause, but excess nutrients are the root," Gilliland said.

This past fall, Hurricane Irma served as the catalyst for fish kills mostly in scattered areas of the St. Johns River, as well as on the Withlacoochee. Warm water, nutrients stirred up on the bottom,  and organic debris blown in by high winds all contributed.

Martin added, "Cypress swamps accumulate very high levels of leaf litter and organics that flush out, but also the water holding in the swamp that gets flushed out contains very little to no oxygen, due to the decaying leaf litter. This becomes a pulse of water with no oxygen coming into the lake (or river)."

Additionally, the biologist explained, storms such as Irma typically bring several days of clouds, which prevent sunlight from stimulating plants to produce oxygen during photosynthesis.

"When there isn't enough sunlight, these organisms stop photosynthesizing and start respiring. Respiration uses oxygen. Add to this that the lower level of sunlight means that some of the plant/algae population will die and decompose, which uses oxygen."

And finally, Martin said, water coming out of swamps typically is dark because of tannin from the trees, providing an additional block to sunlight.

In Louisiana, major hurricanes aren't even needed as the catalyst for warm-weather fish kills in places such as the Atchafayala Basin, according to Alex Perret with the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries.

"We see it annually in some areas," he said. "It all depends on how high the river stays and how late into the summer it goes.  

"That water is just sitting up there on the floodplain, using oxygen up (as leaves and other organic matter decay). Then when that black water is pulled out, fish are killed, and people are alarmed."

But storm-related kills occur too, just as they do in Florida and Chesapeake Bay. Hurricane Rita caused one on the Sabine River in 2005.

"We had widespread kills with Gustav and Ike (hurricanes) in 2008," Perret added. "Hundreds of thousands of dead fish. We had so much organic matter sitting on the bottom that was stirred up. It happened fast and it happened everywhere. It was pretty horrific."

Oxygen-depletion fish kills aren't confined to the South either. They can occur just about anywhere, when conditions are right, as they were on Wisconsin's Indian Lake in Dane County this past summer. Resources managers attributed the kill to low dissolved oxygen caused by a die-off of blue-green algae and aquatic plants.

And they're not confined to warm weather. Winterkills occur occasionally as well, usually late in the season or early spring, as the ice begins to melt.  They're most likely to happen in shallower water bodies with abundant plant growth. Heavy snow cover or ice inhibits sunlight penetration, preventing plants from producing oxygen. That's what happened at Minnesota's Mud Lake near Brainerd in April.

"Winterkill may not be noticed until after ice off, as the ice impedes visibility.  However, the cold temperature delays decomposition, so once the ice comes off, we start seeing those dead fish," said Heidi Rantala with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, who emphasized the importance of the public reporting kills as soon as they are noticed so that causes can be determined.

Toxic Algae

Golden Alga tops the list of fish killers in freshwater, especially in Texas and other areas of the Southwest. It occurs worldwide in coastal waters, but also seems to thrive in inland waters with high salt or mineral content. More than 20 states have reported blooms in recent years.

Deadly to organisms that have gills, blooms are more likely to occur in cold weather and then taper off as the water warms and other algae species become more active. But they can last for days, weeks, or even months.

"Possum Kingdom is a significant reservoir fishery in Texas that has been impacted by Golden Alga for many years now," said Dave Terre with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. "It's had bad years, followed by rebound years."

Of significant concern, he added, is Lake Texoma on the Texas/Oklahoma border, "where Golden Alga has gotten close several times. Minor kills have been documented in the very upper reaches of that reservoir. We always worry about that one."

Sometimes, however, the killers are little known players, such as was the case on Maryland's Middle and Gunpowder River in November and December of 2016. There, a bloom of planktonic organism known as Karlodinium was identified as the culprit.

"The bloom happened because of warm-water temperatures and nutrient input," Love said. "The associated higher salinity levels may have stressed freshwater fish. But our fish evolved in an area with fluctuating salinities so it wasn't the higher salinity that killed them.         

"The bloom resulted in a release of a toxin that attacks the respiratory structures of the fish and basically caused them to suffocate."


More than 100 naturally occurring viruses affect fish and not warm-blooded animals. And some of them are lethal.

For more than a decade, Largemouth Bass Virus (LMBV) was the big concern for bass anglers and resource managers alike. It first was implicated in a fish kill in 1995 on the Santee Cooper system in South Carolina. At  the height of fatal outbreaks in 2001, it had been confirmed in 17 states, ranging from Texas eastward and all the way up to Lake George on the Indiana/Michigan border.

Mostly the kills occurred during warmer water, but scientists still do now know how the virus is transmitted or how it is activated into a fatal disease. Possibly stressed fish might be more likely to die upon contracting the virus. Also, researchers have found no cure or preventative, as is often the case with viruses.

Biologists still periodically check fisheries for presence of LMBV, and occasionally they find bass carrying it. But fatalities have been few and far between for more than a decade. Possibly fish have developed natural immunities.

More recently, viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) has been the headline maker as a fish-killing disease, with the Great Lakes as its focal point. Bass are among the 20 to 30 species of fish it can kill, along with pike, muskie, and crappie. It tends to grow dormant as water warms to 65 degrees, and not all fish that contract it die. Survivors develop immunity.    

The most recent occurrence was last spring on the St. Clair and Detroit Rivers, as well as Lake St. Clair, with fatalities likely in the thousands.

That paled compared to the first outbreak in 2006, when scientists estimate that deaths numbered in the hundreds of thousands to possibly a million. Only Lake Superior was spared, with Erie the hardest hit.

"It's not easy to confirm," said Sara Thomas with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. "We need fish that are almost dead or just dead because VHS breaks down quickly. That's why it's good for people to report to use what's going on."

Along with dozens of species of fish and invertebrates, VHS is an introduced species in the Great Lakes, she said, adding that large populations of gizzard shad could be contributing to its spread.

(A variation of this article appeared originally in B.A.S.S. Times.)


BUFFALO, N.Y. — Human antidepressants are building up in the brains of bass, walleye and several other fish common to the Great Lakes region, scientists say.

In a new study, researchers detected high concentrations of these drugs and their metabolized remnants in the brain tissue of 10 fish species found in the Niagara River.

This vital conduit connects two of the Great Lakes, Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, via Niagara Falls. The discovery of antidepressants in aquatic life in the river raises serious environmental concerns, says lead scientist Diana Aga, PhD, the Henry M. Woodburn Professor of Chemistry in the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences.

“These active ingredients from antidepressants, which are coming out from wastewater treatment plants, are accumulating in fish brains,” Aga says. “It is a threat to biodiversity, and we should be very concerned.

“These drugs could affect fish behavior. We didn’t look at behavior in our study, but other research teams have shown that antidepressants can affect the feeding behavior of fish or their survival instincts. Some fish won’t acknowledge the presence of predators as much.”

If changes like these occur in the wild, they have the potential to disrupt the delicate balance between species that helps to keep the ecosystem stable, says study co-author Randolph Singh, PhD, a recent UB graduate from Aga’s lab.

"The levels of antidepressants found do not pose a danger to humans who eat the fish, especially in the U.S., where most people do not eat organs like the brain," Singh says. "However, the risk that the drugs pose to biodiversity is real, and scientists are just beginning to understand what the consequences might be."

"Fish are receiving this cocktail of drugs 24 hours a day, and we are now finding these drugs in their brains." --- Diana Aga

Aga has spent her career developing techniques for detecting contaminants such as pharmaceuticals, antibiotics and endocrine disrupters in the environment.

This is a field of growing concern, especially as the use of such chemicals expands. The percentage of Americans taking antidepressants, for instance, rose 65 percent between 1999-2002 and 2011-14, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

Wastewater treatment facilities have failed to keep pace with this growth, typically ignoring these drugs, which are then released into the environment, Aga says.

Her new study looked for a variety of pharmaceutical and personal care product chemicals in the organs and muscles of 10 fish species: smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, rudd, rock bass, white bass, white perch, walleye, bowfin, steelhead and yellow perch.

Antidepressants stood out as a major problem: These drugs or their metabolites were found in the brains of every fish species the scientists studied.

The highest concentration of a single compound was found in a rock bass, which had about 400 nanograms of norsertraline — a metabolite of sertraline, the active ingredient in Zoloft — per gram of brain tissue. This was in addition to a cocktail of other compounds found in the same fish, including citalopram, the active ingredient in Celexa, and norfluoxetine, a metabolite of the active ingredient in Prozac and Sarafem.

More than half of the fish brain samples had norsertraline levels of 100 nanograms per gram or higher. In addition, like the rock bass, many of the fish had a medley of antidepressant drugs and metabolites in their brains.

Evidence that antidepressants can change fish behavior generally comes from laboratory studies that expose the animals to higher concentrations of drugs than what is found in the Niagara River. But the findings of the new study are still worrisome: The antidepressants that Aga’s team detected in fish brains had accumulated over time, often reaching concentrations that were several times higher than the levels in the river.

In the brains of smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, rock bass, white bass and walleye, sertraline was found at levels that were estimated to be 20 or more times higher than levels in river water. Levels of norsertraline, the drug’s breakdown product, were even greater, reaching concentrations that were often hundreds of times higher than that found in the river.

Scientists have not done enough research yet to understand what amount of antidepressants poses a risk to animals, or how multiple drugs might interact synergistically to influence behavior, Aga says.

Wastewater treatment is behind the times

The study raises concerns regarding wastewater treatment plants, whose operations have not kept up with the times, says Aga, a member of the UB RENEW (Research and Education in eNergy, Environment and Water) Institute.

In general, wastewater treatment focuses narrowly on killing disease-causing bacteria and on extracting solid matter such as human excrement. Antidepressants, which are found in the urine of people who use the drugs, are largely ignored, along with other chemicals of concern that have become commonplace, Aga says.

“These plants are focused on removing nitrogen, phosphorus, and dissolved organic carbon but there are so many other chemicals that are not prioritized that impact our environment,” she says. “As a result, wildlife is exposed to all of these chemicals. Fish are receiving this cocktail of drugs 24 hours a day, and we are now finding these drugs in their brains.”

The problem is exacerbated, Singh says, by sewage overflows that funnel large quantities of untreated water into rivers and lakes. In August, for example, The Buffalo News reported that since May of 2017, a half billion gallons of combined sewage and storm water had flowed into local waterways, including the Niagara River.


Pollution Is Not Good, But Neither was Obama Clean Water Rule

Capt. Steve Chaconas with Potomac River bass

President Trump recently signed an Executive Order to roll back Obama's  2015 "clean water rule," which greatly expanded federal authority over public and private waters. Below is my 2014 analysis of the proposal, before it was enacted by executive fiat.

 *     *     *     *

We all live downstream.

Thus, pollution poses an exponential threat to our waters and our fisheries. And in a perfect world, no one would pollute.

But we don’t live in a perfect world.

As a consequence, we pollute, sometimes unintentionally and sometimes flagrantly. Along the Potomac River, signs once warned that just touching the water could be hazardous to human health. Ohio’s Cuyahoga River was so polluted that it caught fire. And Lake Erie was known as a “dead sea.” The list of waters degraded and almost destroyed by pollution is a long and shameful one.

We, however, also have learned to clean up after ourselves, prompted by the federal Clean Water Act of1972. Erie now is one of the nation’s most productive fisheries. The Potomac is nationally known for its bass fishing. And the Cuyahoga, a river once devoid of fish, now is home to 44 species. The list of waters enhanced and restored is a long and hopeful one, and we arguably do more to protect our aquatic resources than any other country in the world.

That doesn’t mean that we’ve done as much as we can or should do to minimize pollution. But neither are we living in a time when rivers are catching on fire and as much needs to be done or even can be done, for that matter.

But that doesn’t keep some from trying, especially those who believe that more big government is the solution to our imperfections. That’s why the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to expand the definition of ‘waters of the United States’ to include water on private property.

Additionally, under new proposals, jurisdiction would extend to streams regardless of their size or how frequently they flow, as well as to ditches, gullies, and just about any low spot where moisture collects on a seasonal basis.

And that’s why the move is being heartily endorsed by environmental groups, who argue that court rulings have weakened the CWA.

“It’s taking the way the Clean Water Act works back, so that it works the way water works in the real world,” said Bob Wendelgass of Clean Water Action.

But just how far do you allow the federal government to intrude on the rights of private property owners? Those rights are a cornerstone of who we are as a nation and why so many from all over the world want to live here.

“The EPA’s draft water rule is a massive power grab of private property across the U.S,” said U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith from Texas. “This could be the largest expansion of EPA regulatory authority ever.

“If the draft rule is approved, it would allow the EPA to regulate virtually every body of water in the United States, including private and public lakes, ponds, and streams.”

While I understand and even sympathize with the environmental side of this argument, I do not support such an expansion of power using regulations written by anonymous, unelected bureaucrats. Such decisions should be left up to Congress, which represents the people.

Additionally, many who want to impose ever more strict environmental regulations upon industries, agriculture, municipalities, and now private property owners do so with unrealistic expectations. In their never-ending quest for perfection, they want to reduce pollution limits to levels that can’t even be measured.

“These folks live in la-la land,” one water quality expert told me. “If you attack these things (regulations) as unrealistic, you are evil.

“What I’d really like to see is for them to sustain themselves on their own little happy ¼-acre subdivision lot. I’d be willing to bet every single one of them has a nice, cozy temperature-controlled house, pantry full of food, a sink with a spigot full of safe drinking water and a shower and toilet that take away all that nasty that they just can’t think about, much less live with, while they point fingers at everyone else.”

So . . . would I like to see an end to all pollution?  Absolutely. After all, we all live downstream.

But I believe that’s an unrealistic expectation, considering our prevalence and dominance as a species on this planet. Let’s keep trying to reduce our pollution footprint, but let’s do so with consent of the governed and with realistic standards, not those imposed by anonymous bureaucrats who live in “la-la land.”