Gaffer Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 Shocking. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNYOtshBXLc...player_embedded Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trailhead Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 That's almost like "blinky" the 3 eyed fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giovanne Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 Damn tar sands.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vhawk12 Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 Damn tar sands.. More like damn pulp mills....but nobody seems to notice the sh1t they pump into the river upstream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBBrownie Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 More like damn pulp mills....but nobody seems to notice the sh1t they pump into the river upstream. Are you serious? Sure pulp mills are a contributer, but how did you get so blinded by industry propaganda that you would actually consider a couple of pulp mills to have more effect on water quality in a vast system like the Athabasca compared to the tar sands? Have you ever been there? A question I have for you is why aren't the same water quality issues occuring on the many other rivers in Canada that have (in many cases larger) pulp mills? Correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't heard much in the way of three eyed fish in any of the other systems. Pulp mill effluent is monitored also, by the way. I have been personally involved in effects monitoring jobs sampling fish downstream of pulp mills and while I can't comment beyond that, I am just saying that it happens and they are monitored to some degree. Take a look at Suncor's Tar Island some time and try and tell me that pulp mills are the main problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 4 posts from joke to outrage. About the norm around here recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giovanne Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 4 posts from joke to outrage. About the norm around here recently. You consider this double ended fish "a joke"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 Don't know what I was thinking. I should get all my breaking news from "This Hour Has 22 Minutes." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sstoyberg Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 Damn tarsands....? Do some research. Ever heard of Uranium city. The north shore of the lake has been mined for uranium for a very long time. Blame the oil sands.... They have broad shoulders. Mike from Canmore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sstoyberg Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 P.S. Please ask your wives to stop peeing in the toilet. The hormones are messing up the Long Nosed Dace downstream of Calgary. Dam oilsands... I mean Calgary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share Posted October 22, 2010 4 posts from joke to outrage. About the norm around here recently. No kidding. You would think that with all the anti-depresants people are peeing into the rivers people would be a little less serious. On the plus side, a double headed fish should be easier to catch. Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sundancefisher Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 Are you serious? Sure pulp mills are a contributer, but how did you get so blinded by industry propaganda that you would actually consider a couple of pulp mills to have more effect on water quality in a vast system like the Athabasca compared to the tar sands? Have you ever been there? A question I have for you is why aren't the same water quality issues occuring on the many other rivers in Canada that have (in many cases larger) pulp mills? Correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't heard much in the way of three eyed fish in any of the other systems. Pulp mill effluent is monitored also, by the way. I have been personally involved in effects monitoring jobs sampling fish downstream of pulp mills and while I can't comment beyond that, I am just saying that it happens and they are monitored to some degree. Take a look at Suncor's Tar Island some time and try and tell me that pulp mills are the main problem. LOL... that clip was pretty funny. The last mutated fish was a two headed goldeye...which was really just a perfectly healthy goldeye that had dried out...causing it's jaws to buckle. People still remember the picture...but not the facts. As for pulp mills. I worked on the environmental monitoring...I collected whitefish and pike and other species for toxicity testing and necropsy. 99% of all whitefish we caught had either cancerous lesions on the body or internal organs. These were all caught downstream of the pulp mills. There is well documented scientific evidence of a fibrous toxic dioxin mat that has moved steadily downstream from the mills. I personally almost got physically ill one day working downstream of the mill in Hinton. The water went from clear to chocolate brown after the mill dumped their load into the rivers. The regulations for pulp mills for dumping effluent into the rivers is based upon a diluted volume. If you want to dump more...just mix with more river water. Your defense of the river is profound and great...your understanding of the big picture is muted by your tunnel vision of the issues. Yes...industry pollutes...you pollute daily yourself. We can't stop all pollution but we can try our best and mitigate when possible. Your best protest is to not drive, fly, buy plastics, drop your thermostat down in your house...convince others of the same. You think the oil industry has a lobby group...the forestry lobby is actually bigger and stronger than the oil patch...I have seen them bitch slap the oil industry time and again. The fact you know so little of the pulp mills activities in Alberta...shows me that. Cheers Sun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBBrownie Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 True that Sun, my involvement with pulp mill EM is relatively minor, just stating that there is in fact monitoring that occurs and effect documentation exists. What I was attempting to get at is that it is a joke to say that the tar sands aren't a major pollutor when compared to pulp mills. They both pollute. The two mouthed goldeye is funny in that it was dried out and if I remember correctly, being a bony tongue species, the second mouth was actually just the dried bone tongue protruding. I wouldn't eat fish downstream of either industry. I also realize that industry is necessary, I do have a car, I am guilty, but it would sure be nice to see these industries cleaned up. I do think that it is our responsibility to minimize our everyday consumption. LOL... that clip was pretty funny. The last mutated fish was a two headed goldeye...which was really just a perfectly healthy goldeye that had dried out...causing it's jaws to buckle. People still remember the picture...but not the facts. As for pulp mills. I worked on the environmental monitoring...I collected whitefish and pike and other species for toxicity testing and necropsy. 99% of all whitefish we caught had either cancerous lesions on the body or internal organs. These were all caught downstream of the pulp mills. There is well documented scientific evidence of a fibrous toxic dioxin mat that has moved steadily downstream from the mills. I personally almost got physically ill one day working downstream of the mill in Hinton. The water went from clear to chocolate brown after the mill dumped their load into the rivers. The regulations for pulp mills for dumping effluent into the rivers is based upon a diluted volume. If you want to dump more...just mix with more river water. Your defense of the river is profound and great...your understanding of the big picture is muted by your tunnel vision of the issues. Yes...industry pollutes...you pollute daily yourself. We can't stop all pollution but we can try our best and mitigate when possible. Your best protest is to not drive, fly, buy plastics, drop your thermostat down in your house...convince others of the same. You think the oil industry has a lobby group...the forestry lobby is actually bigger and stronger than the oil patch...I have seen them bitch slap the oil industry time and again. The fact you know so little of the pulp mills activities in Alberta...shows me that. Cheers Sun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sundancefisher Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 True that Sun, my involvement with pulp mill EM is relatively minor, just stating that there is in fact monitoring that occurs and effect documentation exists. What I was attempting to get at is that it is a joke to say that the tar sands aren't a major pollutor when compared to pulp mills. They both pollute. The two mouthed goldeye is funny in that it was dried out and if I remember correctly, being a bony tongue species, the second mouth was actually just the dried bone tongue protruding. I wouldn't eat fish downstream of either industry. I also realize that industry is necessary, I do have a car, I am guilty, but it would sure be nice to see these industries cleaned up. I do think that it is our responsibility to minimize our everyday consumption. Monitoring is voluntary...just like oil sands Even less however as there is no effective organizing body that controls and maintains study control. There is no check to see that upper limits of effluent is controlled. As for pollution...the pulp mill effects travel down to Lake Athabasca. My concern is doubling of the toxicity and maybe acute effects of layering. Many oil sands toxins however are naturally seeping into the river. Hard to quantify. Natural occurring biota have evolved with the oil seeps. I would eat fish downstream of the oil sands...but not downstream of a pulp mill. After working on the fish necropsy... I stopped fishing and eating fish out of the Athabasca. I was too disgusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vhawk12 Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 Are you serious? Sure pulp mills are a contributer, but how did you get so blinded by industry propaganda that you would actually consider a couple of pulp mills to have more effect on water quality in a vast system like the Athabasca compared to the tar sands? Have you ever been there? A question I have for you is why aren't the same water quality issues occuring on the many other rivers in Canada that have (in many cases larger) pulp mills? Correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't heard much in the way of three eyed fish in any of the other systems. Pulp mill effluent is monitored also, by the way. I have been personally involved in effects monitoring jobs sampling fish downstream of pulp mills and while I can't comment beyond that, I am just saying that it happens and they are monitored to some degree. Take a look at Suncor's Tar Island some time and try and tell me that pulp mills are the main problem. Pulp mills are loving this because the "tar sands" as you call them are so "chic" to criticize right now, takes the pressure off them. The pulp mills are loosely monitored at best and pump all kinds of chemical into that river, I have a friend that is a hydrogeologist and says that data is suggesting that these mills are having way more of an impact than previously thought. Listen guy, the McMurray formation naturally outcrops along the Athabasca River and as a result, has been NATURALLY seeping oil into the river for thousands of years. Natives used the "tar" to build their canoes. Tailings ponds are unsightly, who would argue that? You really think that the Athabasca is the only river in Canada with these problems? Why don't you go drink some water from the Columbia downstream of Trail BC? Or maybe the Great Lakes? Give me a break guy. But I'm sure that you ride a pedal bike everywhere and don't use anything made of plastic, and heat your home with a wood burning stove right? Also don't forget that only 16% of all Oilsands development is surface-mineable. Anyway, all I ask is that people form their own opinions, based on fact versus environmental or industry propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 You consider this double ended fish "a joke"? Giovanne: I don't understand your comment. Are you actually thinking that's not a fake fish? Really? You know there are no double headed fish right? Tone, people, tone. Its all about the tone of a post. Smitty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer Posted October 24, 2010 Author Share Posted October 24, 2010 Giovanne: I don't understand your comment. Are you actually thinking that's not a fake fish? Really? You know there are no double headed fish right? Tone, people, tone. Its all about the tone of a post. Smitty No kidding. I will make sure to preface any humour around here with a warning. For those who are not in the know, the video is a spoof based on this LINK which was all over the internet recently I dont know if it is me or what but things are getting very up tight around here. Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sundancefisher Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 I dont know if it is me or what but things are getting very up tight around here. Andrew People are freaking. Winter is coming! LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.