A new study out of Baylor University finds our pharmaceuticals are getting into fish and other aquatic life (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
There’s something fishy with pharmaceuticals. Lester Graham reports researchers find the drugs we take end up in some fish:
Transcript
There’s something fishy with pharmaceuticals. Lester Graham reports researchers find the drugs we take end up in some fish:
If you’re a fish living anywhere near a wastewater treatment plant, you’re swimming in drugs.
A new study out of Baylor University finds our pharmaceuticals are getting into fish and other aquatic life.
Bryan Brooks is one of the researchers.
“In many cases we really don’t know the full potential effects of these kind of drugs on aquatic life.”
This is just the latest research that shows the stuff we take passes through us, and ends up in the water.
There’s not a lot you can do about that, but Brooks says at least don’t flush unused medications down the toilet.
“Perhaps the most appropriate way to dispose of unused medications is directly to landfill when it’s properly packaged.”
The FDA says, mix the drugs with something nasty like kitty litter or old coffee grounds so kids won’t be interested. Then put it all in a sealed bag or can with a lid so it doesn’t leak out of a garbage bag.
Mother-calf pair of "Type C" orcas in the Ross Sea. (Photo by Robert Pitman, NOAA)
Japan kills more whales than any other country in the world. A new proposal would allow Japanese whalers to hunt off their county’s coasts. Mark Brush reports – some think opening up these waters to whale hunts is a bad idea:
Transcript
Japan kills more whales than any other country in the world. A new proposal would allow Japanese whalers to hunt off their county’s coasts. Mark Brush reports – some think opening up these waters to whale hunts is a bad idea:
The International Whaling Commission passed a moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986. But it allowed some countries to kill whales for what it calls scientific study.
Japanese boats kill hundreds of minke whales in the southern ocean under this designation. Critics say there’s nothing scientific about these hunts.
Now, the Commission wants to stop Japan from killing whales in the southern ocean. Phasing out these so-called scientific whale hunts. But in exchange, they might let the country openly hunt whales off its own coasts.
Jonathan Stern is with the American Cetacean Society. He says whale populations could take a hit, if Japan is allowed to start hunting in these waters:
“I’m just afraid once their fleet starts operating. They’re going to want to take more whales and more different species of whales.”
Japan has long maintained that these hunts are part of their cultural heritage. The International Whaling Commission will meet next month to decide the issue.
Countries are getting bad grades because there’s a lot of over-fishing going
on.
(Photo by Stephen Ausmus, courtesy of the USDA)
A new study out in the journal Nature grades countries on their ocean
fishing practices. Rebecca Williams reports even the top countries are not
getting a passing grade:
Transcript
A new study out in the journal Nature grades countries on their ocean
fishing practices. Rebecca Williams reports even the top countries are not
getting a passing grade:
The US, Canada, and Norway are some of the countries doing the best job.
That means they’re fishing in a responsible way.
But they all come in at 60%. That’d be a D, maybe a D-plus.
Tony Pitcher is the main author of the study.
“Wasn’t very encouraging actually that even the top scoring countries were
not really that good. So it wasn’t anything to write home about – we were
at the top but it wasn’t a great field. At the bottom end some countries
were just disastrous. More than half the countries didn’t even pass the
40%.”
Countries are getting bad grades because there’s a lot of over-fishing going
on. There’s illegal fishing. And there’s a big problem with nets and traps
getting lost. They can snare marine mammals, birds and fish.
Tony Pitcher says it’s not always easy to know where your fish came from.
But he says you can look for a blue and white label when you’re shopping.
It’ll say Marine Stewardship Council on it.
Chemicals in the water are mixing up fish's gender (Photo courtesy of US Fish and Wildlife Service)
Scientists already know estrogen from things like ‘The Pill’ is getting into the water and causing reproductive problems for fish. Male fish are picking up female attributes. Some males are even growing eggs. Now a study finds there are other chemicals getting into water that might be messing with fish gender even more. Rebecca Williams reports:
Transcript
Scientists already know estrogen from things like ‘The Pill’ is getting into the water and causing reproductive problems for fish. Male fish are picking up female attributes. Some males are even growing eggs. Now a study finds there are other chemicals getting into water that might be messing with fish gender even more. Rebecca Williams reports:
This study’s found a group of chemicals that block the male hormone testosterone is getting into rivers.
Charles Tyler is the lead author of the paper in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
He says they don’t know exactly where these chemicals are coming from, but some medicines and pesticides can block testosterone. So, add that to the estrogen…
“And so it’s very likely they’re going to have interactive and additive effects, if you like, to induce a double whammy on the poor fish.”
Tyler says they don’t know if what’s happening in fish is also happening in people.
Human male fertility has been declining. But there might be other chemicals contributing to the problem.
And besides, there’s a difference. Fish can’t get away from these testosterone blocking chemicals or the estrogen in the water – they live and swim in them. So Tyler says they’re getting a much higher dose.
The osprey is a bird that scoops fish out of rivers and lakes (Photo courtesy of the National Parks Service)
Ospreys are birds of prey that eat fish. Todd Melby tells us about a pair of osprey that tried to nest near a fish hatchery:
Transcript
Ospreys are birds of prey that eat fish. Todd Melby tells us
about a pair of osprey that tried to nest near a fish hatchery:
The osprey is a raptor that scoops fish out of rivers and lakes.
So when a pair of osprey decided to mate near a DNR fish hatchery south of
Minneapolis, biologists were delighted and worried.
Ospreys rarely nest so far south. So that was good news. What worried biologists was
whether the birds would eat the fish. Biologists decided these fish were too small.
Another worry was the ospreys’ choice of a nesting site. In this case, the birds picked an
electrical power pole.
Lisa Gelvin-Innvaer is with the Minnesota DNR.
“They like high areas. Places that have room for them to put their nest. Transmission
poles often provide that.”
Biologists decided that was a bad idea, so they’ve built a tall nesting platform near the
power pole.
“We’re hopeful with the new nesting platform, that they’ll come back and attempt to nest
again.”
Former US Vice President Al Gore will deliver a special address to the thousands of scientists gathered at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's meeting this week. (Photo courtesy of the US Department of State)
Thousands of scientists from around the world will be hob-knobbing in Chicago, starting today. They’re going to be celebrating the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and how he changed science forever. But they won’t be just celebrating – they’ll be thinking through one of the biggest environmental problems we all face:
Transcript
Thousands of scientists from around the world will be hob-knobbing in Chicago starting today. They’re going to be celebrating the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and how he changed science forever. But they won’t be just celebrating –- they’ll be thinking through one of the biggest environmental problems we all face:
The group’s called the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and they’re putting on their annual meeting – one of the biggest science meet-ups in the world.
This time around there’s plenty of attention on the science of climate change.
The group doesn’t mince words on the issue.
Here’s CEO – Dr. Alan Leschner.
“The last five or more years has been a period of, frankly, denial by the US government about the need to address the problem of global change and its consequences for the world. Now , we think there’s a big opportunity, particularly with the new science appointments made by President Obama to be able to address these kinds of issues in a focused and coherent way.
Scientists there will present work on whether biofuels really help cut carbon emissions, what kind of food crops are best for the climate, and whether we’re losing fish species because global warming.”
And to headline the whole thing – former Vice President Al Gore’s dropping in later this week.
Asian Carp is one species that is very dangerous to the Great Lakes ecosystem (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
Nature never made a connection between the nation’s big rivers and the Great Lakes. But Chicago did. A canal was dug connecting the Mississippi River system – including the Missouri, the Ohio and all their tributaries – to all of the Great Lakes at a point on Lake Michigan. It opened up commercial shipping to the interior of the nation.
But it also opened up both bodies of waters to aquatic life you don’t want traveling back and forth. Invasive species such as the zebra mussel have traveled from one to the other. Asian Carp have already caused havoc in the Mississippi. Some biologists worry the Asian Carp will destroy the four-billion dollar fishing industry in the Great Lakes if it gets in. There’s an electric barrier in place, but some people don’t think that’s enough.
Joel Brammeier is with the environmental group Alliance for the Great Lakes. His group is proposing a barrier that will separate the Mississippi system from the Great Lakes completely, to stop those invasive species. He talked with Lester Graham about the barrier:
Transcript
Nature never made a connection between the nation’s big rivers and the Great Lakes. But Chicago did. A canal was dug connecting the Mississippi River system – including the Missouri, the Ohio and all their tributaries – to all of the Great Lakes at a point on Lake Michigan. It opened up commercial shipping to the interior of the nation. But it also opened up both bodies of waters to aquatic life you don’t want traveling back and forth. Invasive species such as the zebra mussel have traveled from one to the other. Asian Carp have already caused havoc in the Mississippi. Some biologists worry the Asian Carp will destroy the four-billion dollar fishing industry in the Great Lakes if it gets in. There’s an electric barrier in place, but some people don’t think that’s enough. Joel Brammeier is with the environmental group Alliance for the Great Lakes. His group is proposing a barrier that will separate the Mississippi system from the Great Lakes completely, to stop those invasive species. He talked with Lester Graham about the barrier:
Joel Brammeier: Well, ecological separation means no species moving between
the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes. When you consider the problem of
invasive species, unlike chemical pollution, which you can reduce to a certain
safe level, there is no safe level of invasive species. Once two get in, they can
reproduce, and the damage is done, and there’s no going back. So, an
ecological separation means stopping fish, and eggs, and other critters from
moving back and forth between the two systems.
Lester Graham: How do you do that when there’s so much commercial traffic
and recreational boating, and just the water flowing through?
Brammeier: Well, in our research, we found that tech fixes – electrical barriers,
sound barriers, blowing bubbles through the water to try and deter fish from
moving – those things can reduce the risk. But for invasive species, risk
reduction really isn’t enough – you need 100% protection. And to do that, we’re
probably looking at some physical barrier that prevents water and live organisms
from moving between those two great watersheds.
Graham: I can imagine the commercial shippers are not thrilled about that.
Brammeier: Well, I think it remains to be seen. Nobody’s quite sure where the
best place is to put a barrier. We discussed about half a dozen different
scenarios under which you could implement that kind of separation. The
Chicago waterway system does support about 25 million tons, give or take, a
year of commercial commodity traffic – and that’s a significant amount. The
reality is that most of that cargo is internal to the Chicago waterways. So, there
isn’t a huge exchange of cargo between the Chicago waterway and the Great
Lakes. And that’s a good thing. That means we have opportunities to actually
split the system back to the way it historically was, and at the same time, solve
our invasive species problem.
Graham: Now, we can see how that would benefit the environment, but how
would it affect the economy?
Brammeier: Well, again, going back to this issue of commercial navigation. If we
create a separation in this system that has a minimal impact on most of the cargo
in the Chicago waterway, we’re really talking about potentially a very small
impact. And, frankly, there’s an opportunity here to create a benefit for
commodity movements as well. A lot of the cargo transfer facilities on the south
side of Chicago are outmoded, outdated, and not competitive. And, any
investment in this kind of project that changed that and also allowed cargo to
move more efficiently and created new port facilities, could have that kind of
benefit, besides protecting the Great Lakes from invasive species.
Scientists say the oceans are
getting noisier. The racket threatens
whales and other marine mammals that
communicate through sound. Nancy
Greenleese reports:
Transcript
Scientists say the oceans are
getting noisier. The racket threatens
whales and other marine mammals that
communicate through sound. Nancy
Greenleese reports:
The oceans are already noisy from military sonars and oil and gas exploration. Scientists say it could get worse. Some of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, is getting soaked up by the oceans and seas. The carbon dioxide makes the water more acidic. Sound travels through that acidic water more easily. A UN climate change panel recently issued a report raising concerns about the chemistry change. Mark Simmonds of the Whale and Dolphin Conversation Society says already there’s an “acoustic fog” in the world’s waters.
“The ambient noise levels in the oceans because of pH are likely to rise. This is a very unexpected finding. They’re anticipating that marine mammals will have further problems communicating.”
The noise confuses marine mammals. So, they’re beaching themselves and running into ships more often.
Mother-calf pair of "Type C" orcas in the Ross Sea. (Photo by Robert Pitman, NOAA)
Environmentalists have wanted to
“Save the Whales” for decades. But experts
say that can’t happen until the people
realize whales don’t know if they’re in
American waters, Mexican waters or Japanese
waters. Nancy Greenleese reports whales
cannot be saved until all countries protect
them:
Transcript
Environmentalists have wanted to
“Save the Whales” for decades. But experts
say that can’t happen until the people
realize whales don’t know if they’re in
American waters, Mexican waters or Japanese
waters. Nancy Greenleese reports whales
cannot be saved until all countries protect
them:
Whales travel off many countries’ coasts and different countries have different laws
about protecting the animals. Chris Butler Stroud is with the Whale and Dolphin
Conservation Society. He told a United Nation’s conference for the Convention on
Migratory Species that international cooperation is key.
“When countries try to take political action to conserve an animal, they often think of
their own borders. Not remembering that animals are able to move beyond those because
they don’t see the lines in the sand or lines in the water.”
(sound of Gray Whales splashing)
Gray whales swarm around fishing boats off Mexico’s Baja California peninsula.
They’ve traveled -without passports – from the Bering Strait in Russia, into U.S. waters,
through Canada, and back into the U.S. before arriving in Mexico. Here they’re
breeding, and providing a water show to rival Sea World for ecotourists.
“Oh…it’s the baby. Right there! Right next to us. And here comes mom! (Splash) Hey,
wow, right at us.”
There’s an international agreement that bans commercial hunting for gray whales. And
the whales draw tourists. That’s pretty important for a poor country such as Mexico.
The whales are safe here, but not everywhere.
And everywhere the whales travel and threat looms: climate change. Many whale species
migrate to the poles where the ice is disappearing. The World Wildlife Fund predicts
30% of the ice will melt away in the next 30 years unless action is taken.
Wendy Elliot says that means the whales will have to travel even farther to get to the ice
and the food they find there.
“So they’re already hungry, tired, they’ve traveled a long, long way and now they are
going to have 500 km extra to go. So how these species are going to adapt is very
unclear and it’s very concerning.”
Another worry is the growing acidity of sea water. Greenhouse gases from burning fossil
fuels mix with the water and make carbonic acid in the ocean. Monterey Bay Aquarium
Research Institute chemists have determined that the altered chemistry will increase the
distances that underwater sounds travel. That disturbs the communications of marine
mammals. The oceans and seas are becoming a headbangers’ ball from rumbling ships,
air guns used for oil and gas exploration and military sonars.
Nicolas Entrup, managing director for the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society,
lobbied at the UN meeting for an international resolution on marine noise pollution.
“Look, we stressed to the governments that underwater noise is a key threat to whales and
dolphins in the ocean. These animals are acoustic animals.”
The Whale and Dolphin Conservation society says research shows loud underwater
noises causes some whales to beach themselves.
At the UN conference, nations passed watered-down resolution to reduce ship sounds.
They did nothing about the noises made by oil and gas industry and the military. Entrup
is furious.
What we’ve passed is absolutely not enough. And I have to say it’s giving in to the
interests of the military and the industries in that occasion. That’s really bad.”
Officials admit that industrial noise can be reduced but the military, that’s another matter.
The 85 governments at the U.N. conference did agree to provide addition protection for
some small whales. But putting any initiatives into effect will be difficult. The global
financial crisis has drastically limited countries’ contributions to field research on whales
and other migratory species. Entrup with the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society
says the nations of the world cannot ignore the problems.
“If you care, then start now and do not wait until it’s too late. That’s expensive, that’s
irrational, that’s stupid.”
Wildlife groups say rich countries have to reach across borders and give a hand to poorer
countries if we’re going to save the whales.
Fishing laws in Canada and US states often protect small fish and are less restrictive with big ones.
(Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
People who love to fish spend plenty of money on gear, license fees and even gas for their boats. It’s enough to make anglers think, maybe they’re entitled to keeping the biggest fish for trophies or the frying pan, right? Shawn Allee met a researcher who wants you to throw back your biggest catch:
Transcript
People who love to fish spend plenty of money on gear, license fees and even gas for their boats. It’s enough to make anglers think, maybe they’re entitled to keeping the biggest fish for trophies or the frying pan, right? Shawn Allee met a researcher who wants you to throw back your biggest catch:
This is the guy who wants to change how a lot of people fish.
“My name is Paul Venturelli and I study fisheries biology at the University of Toronto.”
Venturelli’s disturbed by how many fish species are on the brink of collapse – either in oceans or in fresh water.
He hopes to grow fish stocks – with this fishing advice.
Toss the big ones back.
And what’s he got to back that up?
“I’ve got about ten pages of notes here. Nah, I’m kidding. I’m kidding.”
Actually, he says the idea is pretty simple.
“A ton of big, old fish will produce more new fish than a ton of smaller, younger fish. And this is because the bigger, older fish tend to produce offspring that have a higher chance of survival.”
Venturelli studies mostly ocean-species, but he says the principal should apply to North American freshwater fish like pike and walleye, too.
But Venturelli’s got a problem spreading this idea around.
Fishing laws in Canada and a lot of US states often protect small fish and are less restrictive with big ones.
I asked one of the head guys in Illinois fisheries, Joe Ferencak, why that is.
“Essentially what you’re doing with that minimum size limit is protecting one or two year classes of reproductive age fish so they can successfully spawn or reproduce.”
Ferencak says, fisheries science has stood behind the ‘protect the small fish’ theory for decades – with some exceptions.
He says to change laws, Venturelli would need to do more studies.
Plus, Ferencak says no state would want to completely keep people from big fish – that’s just not much fun.
“We want to maintain and enhance these fisheries for the benefit of the fishing public, the angler. And it’s kind of counter-intuitive to not allow them to take these larger fish.”
Well, I figure it wouldn’t be fair to talk about big fish without talking to outdoorsmen, so I spent some time in Griffith, Indiana.
It’s about ten miles from Lake Michigan.
Fishing and hunting outlets are all around – and there’s this place.
Allee: “So what’s the establishment.”
Leap: “American Natural Resources.”
Edward Leap Senior runs American Natural Resources – it’s a taxidermy shop – with stuffed deer, fox, and fish filling every nook and cranny.
I figure Leap would rush to the defense of catching big fish, but, you know what? He doesn’t bite.
Allee: “If you get a whole bunch of fish in your boat, I mean, you want to show off the big one. Most people do, right?”
Leap: “Yes and no, though. When you get talking about the conscientious outdoorsman, no, he’s not going to be thinking this way. He’s going to say, ‘I got this fifteen pound walleye, a super-trophy fish. It took a lot of years to grow this fish, I’m going to take a picture of it and I’m going to release it.'”
And, to prove the point, he reaches back and pulls a fish trophy off the shelf.
“For the trophy part of it, we’ll do a reproduction of it that you can’t tell from the real thing. And the fish now is out there spawning, and making eggs, and continuing its species.”
Leap says more and more fishermen are having him make fake fish – or, reproductions, as he calls them.
So, from his vantage, scientists like Paul Venturelli won’t have too much trouble with the advice to ‘throw back the big ones.’
Leap says you don’t have to keep fish you catch, and in his experience, smaller fish make better eating anyway.
A new study out of Baylor University finds our pharmaceuticals are getting into fish and other aquatic life (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
