Lake Niapenco Contaminated

[drsmooth]

http://www.stoneycreeknews.com/news/article/232564

http://www.viewmag.com/13563-FISH+CONTAMINATED+AT+LAKE+NIAPENCO.htm

http://www.viewmag.com/13571-STUNNING+CONTAMINATION+LEVELS.htm

STUNNING CONTAMINATION LEVELS

by Don McLean

March 31 - April 6, 2011

The most contaminated carp in the world live in Hamilton, but not in the harbour. The levels of Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) recorded in Lake Niapenco downstream of the airport even exceed sites directly impacted by production facilities of the toxic chemical, a local biologist told CBLTF television last week.

Dr. Joe Minor says the levels revealed in the environment ministry’s Guide to Eating Sport Fish in Ontario are more than double those reported from the most highly contaminated North American sites in the Mississippi River and Saginaw Bay. A spokesperson from Hamilton airport acknowledged the facility is required to have PFOS to fight airplane fires, but said “we’re not actively using the product” in fire suppression training procedures.

Authorities were alerted to the problems at Lake Niapenco in the Binbrook Conservation Area by a 2009 Environment Canada study on turtles that used the popular recreational area as a ‘clean’ site to compare with Hamilton Harbour and a Toronto site also affected by sewage treatment plants (STPs). Shane de Solla and two other federal researchers were testing for 17 perfluorinated compounds in the plasma of male snapping turtles but were taken aback by what they found.

“Lake Niapenco is a rural site, with no nearby STPs or local industry,” explains an abstract of the scientists’ work presented to a conference last fall. “Unexpectedly, mean concentrations were highest at Lake Niapenco (2.1 Ìg/g), compared to the Humber River (0.12 Ìg/g) and Cootes Paradise (0.53 Ìg/g).”

They conclude that “there is an important but currently unidentified source of PFCs, particularly PFOS, in or upstream of the rural ‘reference’ site” that needs to be pinpointed.

The findings were shared early last year with provincial environment officials and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority which oversees the Binbrook Conservation Area and Lake Niapenco. That led to testing of fish in the reservoir created in the early 1970s by damming the Welland River which confirmed high PFOS levels.

As a result, NPCA staff began warning ice fishers in January, about two months before the mid–March publication of the 2011 guidebook that explained that “consumption restrictions for PFOS begin at 0.080 parts per million with complete restriction advised for levels above 0.160 parts per million for the sensitive population and 0.640 parts per million for the general population.”

The contamination at Lake Niapenco is so severe that carp over 18 inches should NEVER be consumed – with contamination in excess of 0.640 parts per million. The maximum levels reported in carp from Saginaw Bay and the Mississippi river were 0.297 and 0.200 respectively.

PFOS is defined as a “persistent organic pollutant” (POP) of global concern because it bio–magnifies and bio–accumulates. That means it becomes more concentrated as it moves up the food chain (for example, from water insects to small fish to larger fish to mammals or birds that eat fish) and that it is retained in the body rather than easily excreted.

A technical memo provided to the NPCA says “PFOS compounds are persistent in the environment, bio-accumulate in tissues/blood and are toxic.” It also explains that “the human body is slow to rid itself of PFOS” and its most likely source is eating contaminated food.

“These compounds are poorly absorbed through the skin and incidental ingestion of surface water while swimming would not likely expose someone to significant doses,” the memo continues.

More than 250 tonnes of PFOS was imported into Canada between 1997 and 2000, but that largely stopped after its dangers were better understood and 3M voluntarily phased out production in 2002. However about three tonnes were imported since for use in firefighting.

[larry b]

I fished there this winter and was told nothing,glad i got the skunk noww

[Dan Andrews]

Some interesting comments under that second link.

There's an airport downstream. Do they have a training facility upstream where they may use this firefighting foam? how about the Hammertown airport? Have they used it there in the past and is that watershed linked?

[Jiggs Flannigan]

wow, what does this mean for Welland River fish way downstream?

[jesse]

I don't know of anyone who would eat a carp anyway.A few fish polluted or not won't kill ya!The few people that i know who are woried about it are going to caugh up a lung from smoking first or have a Mc D'S heartattack.The smog causes cancer,the drinking water,the etc,etc,etc.....

[drsmooth]

I don't know of anyone who would eat a carp anyway.A few fish polluted or not won't kill ya!The few people that i know who are woried about it are going to caugh up a lung from smoking first or have a Mc D'S heartattack.The smog causes cancer,the drinking water,the etc,etc,etc.....

It's not just carp you shouldn't eat in Lake Niapenco.

Of the six reported species at the Binbrook conservation area, PFOS was found in five – largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, channel catfish, carp and black crappie. For the first four, the Ministry says children under 15 and women of child–bearing age (“sensitive populations”) should eat zero meals per month and men should eat no more than two meals, and then only of smaller fish.

Average meal sizes are defined as eight ounces (227 grams) for an average adult. For the smaller black crappie species, contamination restricts consumption for everyone to no more than four meals per month.

The previous guidebook (2009–2010) endorsed up to eight carp meals a month for men and four for sensitive populations from the reservoir. Its restrictions were based primarily on agricultural pesticides and mercury, but no species at the lake reached the current levels of contamination.

When I say shouldn't eat. I mean I wouldn't eat. Personally I wouldn't eat anything that has any consumption limit.

[Mike Pike]

Sad news to hear about Binbrook. A hardluck lake. Started to make a real comeback regarding contamination and now it looks like one step forward, two steps back.

Still a great little recreational fishery, though. I've introduced lots of little nieces and nephews to fishing on Binny and will continue to do so.

[bucketmouthjohnny]

If i remember correctly, several years ago i did a crappie ice fishing derby, everyone was eating all those crappies but i had read (maybe in consumption guide) that the water was pollluted so i was throwing all mine back. My wife won't eat any fish with consumption limits much like Smooth. I'll have a few smallies from erie once a year, try to catch 1-2 lbers for that.

Sp this story is not really not shocking to me .

bon appetit

[fishkid]

Wow, good timimg on posting this. Thanks. I was just cruising google maps yesterday and saw niapenco for the first time. Never realized that's the lake Binbrook conservation is on. Good to know I will be going elsewhere for a meal.