Slevin Posted September 8, 2012 Report Share Posted September 8, 2012 Lack of oxygen killed Lake Erie fish, tests show dead fish Richard Brennan/Toronto Star The Environment Ministry says a sudden temperature drop in Lake Erie and near-zero oxygen in the water below 12 metres likely caused the mass deaths of thousands of fish over the weekend Tens of thousands of fish that washed up on the north shore of Lake Erie over the Labour Day weekend died of natural causes related to lack of oxygen in the water, early test results reveal. The environment ministry said Friday the water tests confirm that a naturally occurring temperature inversion brought an oxygen-depleted layer of water from the bottom of the lake close to the surface causing the widespread kill. “Samples back from the lab do not show any evidence of a manure spills or anything unusual in terms of contamination. The information that we have suggests the fish may have been killed as the result of natural causes,” said ministry spokesperson Kate Jordan told the Star. Jordan said further data confirmed a sudden temperature drop in the lake and near-zero oxygen in the water below 12 metres. Test results on the fish are expected next week. Meanwhile, the rotting fish carcasses as well as some dead birds continue to line the shore of Lake Erie for 40 kilometres. “The stench is absolutely terrible,” Progressive Conservative MPP Rick Nicholls, MPP (Chatham — Kent — Essex) told the Star. A Natural Resources Ministry spokesperson confirmed Friday that some limited cleanup of the beach at Rondeau Provincial Park had begun but could not say if and when the province planned to proceed with the rest. But that’s not good enough, said NDP environment critic MPP Jonah Schein (Davenport), who called for an immediate cleanup of the entire beach and warned the McGuinty government should not to try to stick the local municipalities with the bill. “My first concern that it’s been a week and it hasn’t been cleaned up. We need the province to take responsibility for this,” said Schein, adding that the slow response is unacceptable. “Obviously there is a stench there but there are also concerns about it getting into the food chain. We don’t know what it is. It is potentially a canary in the coal mine,” he said. People living along the lake from west of Port Stanley to roughly Rondeau Park woke up Labour Day weekend to find the beach covered with fish of all sorts washed up on shore, including yellow perch, carp, sheepshead, catfish, big head buffalo and suckers. Since then seagulls gorging themselves on the carcasses have also died. Nicholls said the whole thing appears to have become a political football with the province saying the cleanup is the responsibility of the municipalities and the municipalities saying unless the fish are on designated swimming areas it is up to the homeowners and cottagers to remove the rotting carcasses. A spokesperson for the Ministry of the Environment said a couple of municipalities have already removed the dead fish from their beaches as have some residents. Chatham-Kent Mayor Randy Hope swept aside any talk of a struggle over jurisdiction, saying that his municipality and residents were quick to do their part at minimal cost to clean up the smelly mess from the public beaches. In some areas, he said, they will be left to decompose or be washed away. Nicholls said Chatham-Kent Medical Officer of Health Dr. David Colby told him that acidity and alkalinity tests came back negative and that the widespread kill was consistent with the “upwelling in the lake,” causing the death of thousands of fish. “Also when I talked to Dr. Colby he said . . . that he feels that there is not a health hazard,” he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerjets Posted September 8, 2012 Report Share Posted September 8, 2012 Why are the seagulls dying when they eat the fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slevin Posted September 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2012 That's the $100 QUESTION ??????? BINGO u r the SMART one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerjets Posted September 8, 2012 Report Share Posted September 8, 2012 I was wondering because they said there isnt any contamination or health hazard but its killing the birds so there must be something wrong..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slevin Posted September 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2012 So the CRAP HAWKS live at the dump eat GARBAGE 90 % of the time 5% fresh kill and 5% steal off us at the pier( fries, donuts ) some one is not telling the whole story ????? and they are fighting who is going to clean this up ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scapulataf Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Well, not all of the seagull that are eating them are dying I'm sure. It does sound suspicious, but there could be a myriad of reasons. Toxin build up especially in the larger fish could have something to do with it. ****Mercury, accumulates in the fish over years and once in the body it doesn't dissipate. Seagulls aren't small birds, but gorging themselves on one or more large fish contaminated with Mercury could definitely have some acute toxic effects. Now substances such as Mercury are generally found in higher concentrations in larger predatory fish, but it is still present in the sediment, and most of the fish listed there are supposed to be bottom feeders. **** Just using Mercury as an example, it could be any number of heavy metals or other toxins. Industry around the great lakes doesn't exactly have a history of environmental responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slevin Posted September 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 True But should it not take some TIME, say if we the fisher man eat 2 a week should we die on the 2nd week or 2 a week for 10 yrs it will hit us ??? The whole story is not here ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icehut Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Who is making the claim for seagull deaths, is the question. Is it one, two, dozens, or hundreds of dead seagulls? If seagulls are dying, then surely other opportunistic predators and carrion eaters all along the shore should be dying; from turtles and racoons to foxes, pet dogs, cats, herons, snakes, hawks, etc. Fish kills are no big deal, turnovers happen in lakes. If it's proven that gulls and other scavengers are dying, then indeed there is more to this story, but I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerjets Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Who is making the claim for seagull deaths, is the question. Is it one, two, dozens, or hundreds of dead seagulls? If seagulls are dying, then surely other opportunistic predators and carrion eaters all along the shore should be dying; from turtles and racoons to foxes, pet dogs, cats, herons, snakes, hawks, etc. Fish kills are no big deal, turnovers happen in lakes. If it's proven that gulls and other scavengers are dying, then indeed there is more to this story, but I doubt it. It just seems odd that they mention the seagulls dying but don't elaborate. The other scavengers may be nocturnal so their bodies could be hidden in the forest...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scapulataf Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 True But should it not take some TIME, say if we the fisher man eat 2 a week should we die on the 2nd week or 2 a week for 10 yrs it will hit us ??? The whole story is not here ??? Possibly. I'm not exactly well versed in the effects of mercury poisining, but I weight 240 pounds. For me to eat several fish in a short time span that are "loaded with mercury" would probably have a minor, if any effect on me. A seagull weighing only a pound or two gorging itself on a few different fish that have mercury in them will probably feel the effects much quicker, maybe in a day or two. My response wasn't meant to be an authoritative "this is what happened" but more of a plausible explanation of what *might* be the cause. Just because they don't elaborate on what caused the seagull's demise, doesn't mean that there is some conspiracy that the gub'mint is trying to cover up. Maybe they just have yet to test the seagull carcasses to see what the cause of death is. No need to break out the tinfoil hats yet people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest live2fish85 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I would think there would be alot of other birds like the damn cormorants and then the terns as they consume more fish then seagulls do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 The fish died from lack of oxygen , they say ........the gulls (how many?) died from eating oxygen deprived fish . Something fishy here . Maybe , after a fish begins to rot the flesh becomes more toxic like when animals have been killed it is necessary to clean out the organs as the liver will quickly begin decomposing the carcass and spoil the meat .I have seen gulls sitting on a floating carp & drum etc. and pecking the eyes out long after the fish was dead . I think the birds have some kind of enzyme in their system that enables them to eat stuff that would make us sick, pronto .....something like a dog eating from garbage cans and not get sick ....... live2fish85......I have never noticed a cormorant eating a dead fish carcass , they seem to do very well getting all they want diving 20' deep to get all the fish they want . But with that sharp hooked beak they have , they could easily dine on any dead fish if they were hungry enough . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest live2fish85 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Smerchly I am well aware that the comorants dive deep for there fish. My point was though that they are eating fish, if there was something that was toxic causing the fish to die I am sure that the cormorants are still going to eat fish that are contaminated, causing them to die. That was the point I was trying to make. I don't truely think that it is something toxic. I grew up on Erie and my parents still live there . I haven't seen the water as low as it is now and last the for this period of time. My parents break wall usually has water right to the bottom and there is now a good sized beach. I think it is just natural cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I agree , I see some small fish on the beach there , possibly perch . A few years ago there were reports of many dead drum at the Bay of Quinte , and a year after , a lot of catfish died off there . This whole scene makes me a little jittery about eating perch etc. from Erie until a full toxicology report is published . We had a very hot summer & many bodies of water have a heavy cover of green algae which rots and becomes toxic ......mother nature at her un-finest ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas69er Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 every year somewhere in north America there is a large fish die off for one reason or another, but it sucks when its local and it sucks when its due to polution, but its the cycle of life and happens, that stench was a little strange for sure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.