By: Phuong Lee
Published By: The Associated Press
Summary
Washington state's standards assume consumers can safely eat less than 8 ounces of fish per month. Regulators want to higher this amount so it could be sanitary to eat about 24 times this amount. The harmful toxins involved in the consumption of fish are mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls. If fish consumption shall indeed become higher, fewer toxic pollutants would be allowed in state waters. This process would ensure tighter restrictions for the Washington residents. State officials want a fish consumption rate to allow races including the Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and local fishermen to continue to consume their normal amount. A lot of tribes already have water quality standards that reflect on local tribal waters. A handful of township directors believe this rate is still too low to represent certain areas so they almost "ignore" the rate and believe that it should better account for the people who eat fish the most. The main goal for the Washington people is to seek a reasonable and cost efficient solution.
Opinion/Reflection
The problem that has arisen in Washington is a problem that is faced by most states. The water quality in most states vary, but the common goal is to have less contaminates in our bodies of water. The article touches upon the aspect of consuming marine life but there is also the other facet of consuming water. The water quality affects both of these things which deals with the amount contaminates and pollutants in the water. Law restrictions is the next step needed to be taken in the state of Washington and every other 49 state. With many creeks and ponds in our area, we can see how pollutants such as pesticides end up into our water. In a suburban area, most home owners use some type of fertilizer to help their grass grow. I know for instance my family uses grass seed grower when our grass is burnt out in certain areas. The side people including myself do not see, is the affects it has on our water quality.
Questions
Why is public use of pesticides not warranted to limit contaminates in our water?
What is the U.S.'s water quality in comparison to other countries?
Whose jurisdiction covers the reviewing of townships' water quality?
What are the steps in testing a body of water's water quality?
Washington state's standards assume consumers can safely eat less than 8 ounces of fish per month. Regulators want to higher this amount so it could be sanitary to eat about 24 times this amount. The harmful toxins involved in the consumption of fish are mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls. If fish consumption shall indeed become higher, fewer toxic pollutants would be allowed in state waters. This process would ensure tighter restrictions for the Washington residents. State officials want a fish consumption rate to allow races including the Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and local fishermen to continue to consume their normal amount. A lot of tribes already have water quality standards that reflect on local tribal waters. A handful of township directors believe this rate is still too low to represent certain areas so they almost "ignore" the rate and believe that it should better account for the people who eat fish the most. The main goal for the Washington people is to seek a reasonable and cost efficient solution.
Opinion/Reflection
The problem that has arisen in Washington is a problem that is faced by most states. The water quality in most states vary, but the common goal is to have less contaminates in our bodies of water. The article touches upon the aspect of consuming marine life but there is also the other facet of consuming water. The water quality affects both of these things which deals with the amount contaminates and pollutants in the water. Law restrictions is the next step needed to be taken in the state of Washington and every other 49 state. With many creeks and ponds in our area, we can see how pollutants such as pesticides end up into our water. In a suburban area, most home owners use some type of fertilizer to help their grass grow. I know for instance my family uses grass seed grower when our grass is burnt out in certain areas. The side people including myself do not see, is the affects it has on our water quality.
Questions
Why is public use of pesticides not warranted to limit contaminates in our water?
What is the U.S.'s water quality in comparison to other countries?
Whose jurisdiction covers the reviewing of townships' water quality?
What are the steps in testing a body of water's water quality?
I think that the water quality should have more stricter standards. My family and I eat a lot of fish in a month and with the standards saying that we can only eat less than 8 ounces of fish safely is pretty bad for us. I think that if there would be more of a control with the pollution in the bodies of water across the states, and the world, people could have a less chance of getting mercury and other chemicals. It's not fair for the places that have a high fish consumption due to living by the water to limit the amount that they're supposed to eat.
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how there is much more mercury in canned tuna than what is being told to consumers.
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/healthday/635854.html
Less than 8 ounces of fish per month is not a lot of fish. Fish give us protein which we need; we should not have to be worried about the mercury and other toxins in the water. The toxins are from the factories and waste plants that get rid of there waste by putting them in the closest ponds/water areas. This is lowering our drinking water rates as well as contaminating the fish. Fish could be a main source of food for people like vegetarians. This could put them at a high risk for problems from the toxins also. I have learned a little bit about this in science class during middle school;nothing has been done to try and fix it. I think about this problem now when my family eats fish for dinner because my family definitely eats more than 8 ounces a month.
ReplyDelete~why is this not more publicly known?
~How much mercury is in our drinking water?
~What is another way the factories can get rid of waste so we do not have this problem anymore?
~ What are the effects of mercury?
~Are there any ways to avoid the problem and eat safer fish?
I find this topic very interesting. I would never think that state regulator would use something like that to get pollutants out of the water. I know people pollute the waters but i didnt realize that it was this bad i use things like fertilizer that pollute the water but I didnt realize how bad it was
ReplyDelete-What does mercury do to you
-How are we gonna make sure people consume this fish
-Are there any other ways to get mercury out of the water
I found another article about mercury in Washingtons waters http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Be-quick-to-end-mercury-pollution-1104494.php