Jump to content

Pollution in the backcountry


olyclimber

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We've known about this for quite a while up on this side of the line, too. Fish in Bow Lake and Lake Louise - to name a couple of prominent examples - are not fit to eat. Seems that airborne pollutants precipitate out as snow, which melts into lakes that stay so cold the chemicals never re-evaporate and move on. So they just keep accumulating. Ultimately it all ends up in the Arctic, depriving the Innu of their traditional foods because seal and beluga flesh is poisoned by chemicals that originated in industrial areas thousands of miles away. Mothers in some areas of the Arctic are cautioned against breast-feeding their children because their own bodies are toxic.

 

And some people think old balloons in the backcountry are a problem...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, are the streams they are taking the fish samples from reintroduced with fish? Would one of the Trailblazers know?

 

I don't know the exact origin of the exact fish they took samples from, but I can tell you that the fish in our high lakes are either stocked or the descendants of stocked fish. The high lakes here didn't originally have fish in them.

 

As I mentioned upthread, they have found heavy metals in high concentrations in fish in the Hagen/Bacon/Blum area. There was a Draft EIS written a few years ago about whether or not to continue stocking in the Park (it is a pretty rare thing in the NPs at this point in time) and the information was in the EIS. BTW that decision has still not been issued by the Park. I believe that stocking is expected to continue in the few lakes in the NCNP until that decision is handed down.Right now the process is stalled due to a piece of legislation that the DEIS asks for to enable the continuation of stocking. Three possible outcomes I see on that: the legislation passes and limited stocking is premitted to continue, the legislation stays in limbo indefinietly and stocking continues, the Park makes a decision without the legislation. I don't think anyone really knows what the outcome will be.

 

Fair question, I might add, Kat, but I'm wondering what difference it makes? The fact that the fish hold these toxins does not bode well for the overall ecological health of the affected areas, the fish are just an effective way to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...