This is Horrible!!!! I have so many questions right now if you can help with any of them I would really appreciate it

1) What company, agency or person is responsible for the contamination of these waterways?

2) Say you do eat over 8 ounces what possible health risks could you have?... and just how probable is it to have health problems is this like one in a million or more like 1 in 3

3) They have mentioned that more waterways could be included..How probable is that more waterways might be included and which ones do you believe will be added to this list?

4)Catfish are abundant in many rivers and lakes throughout Texas could many of the fish that thrive in these be contaminted as well?

Any and all info is greatly appreciated?

I'll try to answer your questions the best I can.

1) At this time it's unclear what the source of the contamination is. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is the state agency responsible for identifying the sources and have them cleaned up. There has been a recent discovery of an old waste storage facility that was originally located along the banks of the San Jacinto River, just north of I-10. Over time the river has changed its' route in this area and the waste disposal site is now located in part of the river. The company who owned the site has long since gone out of business but the site was recently added to the Superfund Site list which should lead to its' cleanup. You can find more information about this at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/water/tmdl/26-hscdioxin.html and http://epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1773.htm.

2) I'm no medical doctor so really can't answer your question however, I'd suggest checking one of these sites for more information about exposure levels. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs - http://www.stsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or ATSDR Public Health Statements - http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phshome.html

3) The Texas Department of State Health Services, Seafood and Aquatic Life Group conducted all of the sampling that led to this advisory. Due to the high costs associated with this type of sampling ($2,000 per fish) and no funding to the Dept. for this type of work (this sampling was conducted using research grant funds from other organizations) the sampling area was directed at Galveston Bay and the other associated bays within the system (East Bay, Trinity Bay, West Bay, Chocolate Bay). Christmas Bay and the beaches along the Gulf adjacent to these bays were not included in the advisory primarily because no samples were taken from these areas.

4) The Texas Department of State Health Services, Seafood and Aquatic Life Group is the agency responsible for assessing human health risks from eating fish and shellfish. There are some lakes and rivers that have consumption advisories associated with certain species of fish. A complete list of all of the consumption advisories throughout the state can be found at http://dshs.state.tx.us/seafood/. Click on the link to "Fish Consumption Advisory" located on the left side of the page.

I hope this helps answer your questions. Please feel free to contact me if you have others.

Lance Robinson
TPWD - Coastal Fisheries
Dickinson Marine Laboratory
lance.robinson@tpwd.state.tx.us

wow nice post..nice questions..and nice explanation lance...good thing im a redfish and flounder guy = )

This is not a new problem, as it states in the advisory there has been a similar one in place since 1990, I am just wondering why the state hasnt done anything to prevent the problem from spreading.

There's a very big difference between this advisory and those of the past. The 1990 advisory did not include specs and the 2005 advisory which did include specs applied only to Upper Galveston Bay and the Houston Ship Channel. This advisory includes East Bay, Trinity Bay, West Bay, Chocolate Bay as well as all of Galveston Bay.

Of more concern to me is that the testing was limited...due to the high cost of $2000 per fish. Anybody want to bet on Christmas Bay? How about the Galveston surf?

Fixing this problem, I fear, will be a long term, very expensive proposition.

I copied this from another thread to try to keep a post of relevant information and ideas together on this very important topic:

http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/sports/outdoors/fishreport071008.pdf

I spent the better part of this afternoon reading the report that the recent Galveston Bay Spotted Sea Trout advisories were based on. IMHO the results and recommendations of the report have not been very well represented by the media (what's new?). I suggest forum readers with any kind of science background read the report and it's conclusions and recommendations and let us know if you think the issued advisories are accurate and warranted.

One thing that I did was plot the map showing the testing sites and wrote on the map the number of specs and gaftop taken at each location. As you look at that plot of data, consider what you know about those locations and the tidal currents from the gulf through the passes. Then look at the test data for those locations. Then read what the recommendations are for consumption of specs and make your own opinion compared to the issued advisory. What I read is a healthy adult can eat 3 meals per month of Spotted Sea Trout based on the averages, but I haven't seen that in the media. I've never eaten a gaftop and don't plan to start, but the media didn't differentiate and apparently assumed if you eat one you eat both.

I hope the researchers will ask for help from fishermen in collecting specimens next time so the data can be updated for a better distribution of data throughout the bay system. I'll agree to anchor next to them or take them in my boat so they know where I caught them.

To publish advisories with the kind of potential financial and recreational impact this will have based on that interpretation of this report is unbelievable.

eat more chicken