Dioxins west of harbour bridge

[ALI-G]

Saw this article today.

Despite multi-lingual warnings, anglers are consuming toxic fish caught west of the Harbour Bridge, experts fear

After 280 hours monitoring 570 locations on Sydney Harbour, the science is in. Anglers are fishing with gusto west of the Harbour Bridge and many are keeping and cooking the catch with long-term deleterious effects, experts fear.

Dr Luke Hedge from the Sydney Institute of Marine Science told the ABC that a detailed study of how Sydney residents use the harbour has revealed an alarming find.

Hedge looked into where Sydneysiders “drive their boats, where they fish, where they drop their anchors, how many people go to the beach — all these things that make Sydney such a unique place.”

His fieldwork revealed up to 20 boatloads of anglers were fishing Lane Cove River, around Cockatoo Island, with many more casting a line from wharves west of the Harbour Bridge like those at Woolwich, Pyrmont and around Drummoyne.

There is nothing illegal about fishing west of the Harbour Bridge, and some of the best sportsfishing in the whole of harbour exists in the polluted Parramatta and Lane Cove rivers, where the deep holes are hotspots for big jewfish.

But the concern is that, despite warnings and signage to the contrary, anglers are catching, keeping and consuming fish likely to have dangerously high levels of dioxins, which are a known carcinogen.

Dioxin and heavy-metal levels from industrial pollution have accumulated in the sediments in the muddy bays west of the Harbour Bridge. Constant ferry services creating a groundswell that erodes the banks and stirs up the toxic sludge.

Fish tissue sampled in areas west of the bridge such as Homebush Bay exceeded health standards. As a result, commercial fishing was been banned in Sydney Harbour in 2006. Experts are now calling for further testing.

Many if not most of the anglers keeping fish to consume west of the Harbour Bridge are new to Australia or have English as a second language.

Recreational fishing in the Harbour has not been banned, but anglers are urged to follow dietary advice on the consumption of seafood from the waterway.

Anglers should practise catch and release wet of the Harbour Bridge. Based on advice from an expert panel, the Government recommends that:

<< No fish or crustaceans caught west of the Sydney Harbour Bridge should be eaten. You should release your catch.

<< For fish caught east of the Sydney Harbour Bridge generally no more than 150 grams per month should be consumed.

<< Testing of popular species has allowed for more accurate dietary advice.

The table above provides advice on the maximum consumption of a single species. The full Sydney Harbour usage study will be released later this year. Hopefully, it's not a precursor to fishing bans and identifying areas to set aside for marine-park usage.

[fragmeister]

Yes, its a worry.

I wonder if the fish know that they are supposed to stay either side of the bridge so the anglers know which ones the can eat!

The quantity of the fish depends on the species but still I think bream west of the harbour bridge are in the category of 150 grams per month... that isn't even a feed!

[stevefish]

You really wanna eat a bream that has been eating things that have been filtering THAT water for the last 10 years?

You are right though, it would be interesting to know how much they move about, where has that clean beach bream really been?

[Couta]

For bream caught west of the bridge the recommended consumption level is zero. Fort bream caught east of the bridge its 150gms per month. Bream have one of the lowest consumption levels of the fish surveyed. Almost all other fish have much higher consumption levels.

Dioxins is a very toxic group of chemicals. It came from the Union Carbide factory at Homebush, where among other things, they manufactured Agent Orange used in the Vietnam war.

[Krispy !]

Tbh alot of fish caught west of the bridge such as kingfish, bonito, trevally can all be eaten without fear since they are pelagic and move around alot. big grey area and nothing is conclusive, more research needed on this topic.

[Yowie]

Fish move around a bit, some more than others. Bottom feeders tend to stay in the one area more than pelagics (as Krispy stated)

The only way to find out is for Fisheries to tag a few bream, whiting, flatties, jackets, etc, to see where they move over time.

Drawing an imaginary line under the Harbour Bridge (eat fish caught to the east, don't eat fish caught to the west) is not specific enough, unless you consider not eating fish caught from around Homebush and to the west of that location.

[thefisherman6784]

Fish move around a bit, some more than others. Bottom feeders tend to stay in the one area more than pelagics (as Krispy stated)

The only way to find out is for Fisheries to tag a few bream, whiting, flatties, jackets, etc, to see where they move over time.

Drawing an imaginary line under the Harbour Bridge (eat fish caught to the east, don't eat fish caught to the west) is not specific enough, unless you consider not eating fish caught from around Homebush and to the west of that location.

The only problem is, who would think of tagging a fish like that

Let alone a satellite tag to track the fish.

That would be a very good idea otherwise and very interesting to track these sort of fish and where they go during different months or even different weather .

It would give us a very good understanding of the fish and their behaviour

I'm sure people have tagged them but not satellite tags

Cheers thefisherman6784

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[fragmeister]

For bream caught west of the bridge the recommended consumption level is zero. Fort bream caught east of the bridge its 150gms per month. Bream have one of the lowest consumption levels of the fish surveyed. Almost all other fish have much higher consumption levels.

Dioxins is a very toxic group of chemicals. It came from the Union Carbide factory at Homebush, where among other things, they manufactured Agent Orange used in the Vietnam war.

Yes Sorry, I mean't East of the Bridge. ( don't trust me if we get caught way off shore with only a compas!)

Edited August 18, 2014 by fragmeister

[fragmeister]

You really wanna eat a bream that has been eating things that have been filtering THAT water for the last 10 years?

You are right though, it would be interesting to know how much they move about, where has that clean beach bream really been?

Yes, thats my point,

Who knows where the bream has been living most of its life.

I generally don't eat much bream just because I would eat 5 times the recommended amount in a single sitting.

[GoingFishing]

An interesting topic.......

Perhaps fisheries should be testing fish west if the bridge, east of the bridge and from the outside beaches such as manly and bondi. That way they can consider dioxin levels for all fish and make a fair comparison.

Also for fish that move in and out, how long does it take for these chemicals to enter the fishes system and similarly, how long does It take to leave the fishes system ? For example a kingfish caught west of the bridge might take on these chemicals and they may dissipate within 1 month ? 2 months ? Problem is....... How does one know how long a fish has been in a specific location....

There are so many variables with so many end results

[leonardgid]

I could never understand why i can eat fish from one side of the bridge but not the other , im also certain that those of us that eat fish from the west side of the bridge asked them self the same question and decided that the same fish that one can catch on the west side will also be as some stage on the east side as well , lets take for example the bull sharks that they tagged and monitored for a season , they were traveling up and down the river all the time , so you would think that predators like jewfish and kingfish would behave in a similar way , this is the reason why allot of us can be found on almost all of the ferry wharfs just about every night of the year , if they want to see a change in peoples behavior they should be looking for the answer to this question.

[The Incredible Hull]

"Dioxin and heavy-metal levels from industrial pollution have accumulated in the sediments in the muddy bays west of the Harbour Bridge. Constant ferry services creating a groundswell that erodes the banks and stirs up the toxic sludge."

This reminds me of the other month when I flushed my outboard in a tank full of fresh water for the first time. After turning the motor on, the clear water went all hazy and sludge started to appear on top of the water. Imagine constant ferry services...

[fragmeister]

Looking into this a little more it appears that the initial problems was with the industry around Homebush but the movement of the dioxins and heavy metals does not account for heavy concentrations elsewhere in the Harbour.

Areas such as Neutral Bay have some of the highest concentrations of DDT and lead and it is clear that this does not come from Homebush.

According to the researchers, the biggest problem now is the constant runoff from storm water around the Sydney which of course washes in all those bi-products of motor vehicle use including products in the car tyres.

According to the same guys there is no plan in place for dealing with this now or in the future but it could be addressed relatively easily with simple filtering of storm water.

I guess part of the problem is that the Harbour looks great... the sparkling clear water belies the fact that underneath is a bit of a disaster... if dioxins turned the water black or smelled like rotten eggs something would be done about it.

I must admit I am a little confused about the toxicity of some of these chemicals... apparently a singe 150 gram mullet has the entire maximum intake for humans of dioxins for a whole year. How does the toxic little bugger survive those high levels in its system.

Maybe us fishos should watch for the next protest and get our there in force. Perhaps a show of concerned voters may have some impact.

Edited August 18, 2014 by fragmeister

[cameldownunder]

how long does It take to leave the fishes system ?

That's the problem. i don't think it will leave.

[Yowie]

The only problem is, who would think of tagging a fish like that

Let alone a satellite tag to track the fish.

That would be a very good idea otherwise and very interesting to track these sort of fish and where they go during different months or even different weather .

It would give us a very good understanding of the fish and their behaviour

I'm sure people have tagged them but not satellite tags

Cheers thefisherman6784

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Many years ago, before satellite tagging, Fisheries tagged various fish with a clip on tag.

[wazza69]

I would like to see similar tests done of fish and associated marine life in Botany Bay, and effects on them after it was revealed that Orica had admitted to contaminating ground water found in the subterrainean aquifer under the suburb of Botany. Their budget for the three year " pump and suck " clean up program was initially 100 million dollars, apparently this was revised upwards after 15 months ! Needless to say, I don't fish the bay anymore.

Would also be interested in similar science research of the Georges River, particularly since the federal government approved their licence request to release water from the tailings dams ( ie water that is not stable or fit for human contact.....) into the Georges River from the BHP colliery near Appin.

[fragmeister]

I would like to see similar tests done of fish and associated marine life in Botany Bay, and effects on them after it was revealed that Orica had admitted to contaminating ground water found in the subterrainean aquifer under the suburb of Botany. Their budget for the three year " pump and suck " clean up program was initially 100 million dollars, apparently this was revised upwards after 15 months ! Needless to say, I don't fish the bay anymore.

Would also be interested in similar science research of the Georges River, particularly since the federal government approved their licence request to release water from the tailings dams ( ie water that is not stable or fit for human contact.....) into the Georges River from the BHP colliery near Appin.

Can't agree more.

I think the state government owe it to us to have a comprehensive investigation into water quality, sediment contamination and marine life in all the Sydney Waterways.

[VBCB]

Tbh alot of fish caught west of the bridge such as kingfish, bonito, trevally can all be eaten without fear since they are pelagic and move around alot. big grey area and nothing is conclusive, more research needed on this topic.

I thought so for a while, although, recent studies have been done and fishes have been tagged contrarily to what some say, it appeared that some kingies are "visitors" and others are sedentary, some have stayed 365+ days west of the bridge, some even stayed as far as Balmain all year. Others came many times in and out the harbour, in other words they'd be 3 types:

• sedentary
• regular visitors
• fully pelagic / come once if they happen to follow baitfish or stuff like that

As per bonies, they haven't been tagged as far as I'm concerned but since they cannot cope with brackish I'd guess they are just passing / stopping by during little periods of time.

Finally, it is possible for anglers to be part of tagging programmes on pelagic species, so if those fisherman from Sydney Harbour are keen to help research, they should contact fisheries and get involved

[VBCB]

I'd also add that bottom species might be more likely to be contaminated but since pelagics feed on small specimens of bait, they are contaminated too. Dioxin stay in fishes fat forever, they pass from one link of the chain to another, so they do in our organs / fat

[wizza]

another issue is how much pollutant is in the fish flesh we eat as against in the organs,of the fish discarded on cleaning it Cheers wizza

[Stellar fish]

I agree the issue is with the fat.

I haven't seen too many fat fish in the Parramatta river.

Toxins are naturally flushed out of the body when ingested.

They only get deposited in the fatty tissue, where they accumulate over time.

So simple solution is..... don't get fat or eat fatty foods.

My theory has been proven by the Japanese. Since the early 1900's heavy metals and toxins have abounded in Japan's estuaries.

They eat anything that lives in the water and have one of the highest life expectancies in the world.

But it's hard to find a fat Japanese person, well....apart from the odd Sumo wrestler.

[aceace]

Looking into this a little more it appears that the initial problems was with the industry around Homebush but the movement of the dioxins and heavy metals does not account for heavy concentrations elsewhere in the Harbour.

Areas such as Neutral Bay have some of the highest concentrations of DDT and lead and it is clear that this does not come from Homebush.

According to the researchers, the biggest problem now is the constant runoff from storm water around the Sydney which of course washes in all those bi-products of motor vehicle use including products in the car tyres.

According to the same guys there is no plan in place for dealing with this now or in the future but it could be addressed relatively easily with simple filtering of storm water.

I guess part of the problem is that the Harbour looks great... the sparkling clear water belies the fact that underneath is a bit of a disaster... if dioxins turned the water black or smelled like rotten eggs something would be done about it.

I must admit I am a little confused about the toxicity of some of these chemicals... apparently a singe 150 gram mullet has the entire maximum intake for humans of dioxins for a whole year. How does the toxic little bugger survive those high levels in its system.

Maybe us fishos should watch for the next protest and get our there in force. Perhaps a show of concerned voters may have some impact.

That's the maximum amount of toxins we can consume without any major side effects. However, at levels higher than this (obviously varies across different people) side effects can occur, such as excessive fatigue or lethargy or maybe development issues in children who are still growing. however, these chemicals do not kill instantly so fish can swim around for quite a long period of time without dying but is probably ill in some way. also with some toxins, it will probably pass through the fish's system but with heavy metals such as lead, it will stay in the fish's (and also YOURS) body indefinitely. and also they have rules east/west of the bridge because they have to have a definite boundary where their recommendations exist but fish from that has lived at the west side of the bridge for its whole life can easily swim into the east side. so personally i would refrain from eating any fish in that region because i dont think it is worth it. The potential complications that could arise in the future far outweigh the enjoyment you get from eating your catch. But i digress, at the end of the day i guess its all up to you and no one can tell you what to do. hahaha Peace guys.

[fragmeister]

I agree the issue is with the fat.

I haven't seen too many fat fish in the Parramatta river.

Toxins are naturally flushed out of the body when ingested.

They only get deposited in the fatty tissue, where they accumulate over time.

So simple solution is..... don't get fat or eat fatty foods.

My theory has been proven by the Japanese. Since the early 1900's heavy metals and toxins have abounded in Japan's estuaries.

They eat anything that lives in the water and have one of the highest life expectancies in the world.

But it's hard to find a fat Japanese person, well....apart from the odd Sumo wrestler.

Well, after looking into this further its a pretty good theory.

Not a lot of evidence that could be substantiated I have to say but I think the strategy of keeping the weight down

is certainly arguably the best way of improving you health regardless.

Cheers Jim

[ALI-G]

Pretty shocking that these companies get away with this kind of ecological disaster.

What are they doing to fix what they have done? If it was an oil spill they would be forced to clean it up, seems to be a case of out of sight out of mind.

Makes me quite happy I don't catch too many fish!

Edited August 23, 2014 by ALI-G

[jimmy72]

didn't all this 'Re-start' after the 2000 olympics when they did all the construction at homebush and stirred up all the toxins in the mud/ dirt etc

thats 14 years ago now and its still haunting us.... or was it always an issue and they only started to do real testing after the olympics.

why is there no remediation talked about? the cost? guess its easier to just say dont eat the fish and put the onus on the population that the culprits -- there is something wrong with that a lot of money was spent on the olympics, and venues there still make money as have the developers building off the back of the Olympics and the ones building now off the back of the infrastructure that is there

i don't know for sure but ive never heard a peep about any of those who profited contributing to some kind of remediation attempt, let alone the companies that put the dioxins in there in the first place - most probably non existent now - what about the SOCOG or the international olympic committee did they spend any money on remediation?

wiki says Sydney Games cost A$6.6 billion, with a net cost to the public between A$1.7 and A$2.4 billion. wonder how much spent on prevention of releasing the dioxins and remediation after? -- a drop in the ocean perhaps ?

the whole thing stinks !

rant off