|
Post by Admin on Jul 10, 2015 3:44:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 7, 2015 1:40:17 GMT
For years the CDAO has lobbied for an invertebrate species test program to give the State time to respond to the threat of contamination that we find contaminating our clams today. Not only was our request denied the State has also denied our request to implement crab or clam management plans. The time for action is slipping by.
Why do we care about inorganic arsenic and not total arsenic?
Most arsenic found in fish and shellfish is in the form of organic arsenic. Organic arsenic is considered non-toxic to humans. Another form known as inorganic arsenic has the potential to cause toxicity in people who consume contaminated shellfish. DEQ’s testing in softshell clams (Mya arenaria) revealed that inorganic arsenic was much higher than expected based on studies of other species of shellfish. Additional testing determined that most of the inorganic arsenic found in these softshell clams was confined within the siphon skin.
What are the health effects of inorganic arsenic?
Chronic (long-term) exposure to inorganic arsenic can increase the risk of cancers of the skin, bladder, liver and lung. Chronic exposure can also cause wart-like skin problems, increase the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular problems (such as high blood pressure), and cause neurological problems including painful numbness or “pins and needles” sensations in toes and fingers.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 7, 2015 2:09:58 GMT
My fellow clam diggers, I have posted our email request to Directors Melcher and Pedersen requesting information about the State's plan to deal with the contaminated softshell clams. Bill
"Dear Directors Petersen and Melcher:
Now that the State has posted advisories limiting the consumption of soft shell clams does the State have a plan to deal with the problem? If so, would you send us a copy to review? In addition, we would like to get copies of all the results for all of the tissue samples for all the shellfish tested in our bays.
Were soft shell clams tested from all of Oregon's Bays for elevated levels of organic arsenic? What is the source of the contamination? Does the organic arsenic come from the upper watershed or from the Ocean? How do the test results differ from bay to bay? Does the level of contamination vary from tidal flat and clam bed to clam bed within the same bay? Has the State tested the soft shell clams in all of Oregon's estuaries where soft shell clams are taken for human consumption? The questions are seemingly endless.
We are aware that tissue sample testing is underway for additional clams species in our bays. Would you send us those test results? We recommend keeping the public in the loop. We suggest issuing press releases on a timely basis.
We recommend that the State develop a plan to reduce the levels of organic arsenic in our bays. Elevated levels of organic arsenic are not the only environmental challenges facing Oregon's regulatory authorities. Are our State Agencies up to the job?
Thank you for your consideration, Bill Lackner for the CDAO."
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 7, 2015 2:18:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 11, 2015 15:22:11 GMT
From: WILLIAM LACKNER (williamlackner001@msn.com)
Sent: Sat 10/10/15 9:05 PM
To: Rep.DavidGomberg (rep.davidgomberg@state.or.us); Curt Melcher (curt.melcher@state.or.us); dick.pedersen (dick.pedersen@state.or.us); tloew@statesmanjournal.com (tloew@statesmanjournal.com); theworldnews (theworldnews@theworldlink.com); Lori Pillsbury (pillsbury.lori@deq.state.or.us); Dean Fleck (newport@englundmarine.com); Rep.CaddyMcKeown (rep.caddymckeown@state.or.us); Senator, Arnie Roblan (sen.arnieroblan@state.or.us); Steve Card (editor@newportnewstimes.com) Dear David. We have given a great deal of thought to steps the State Agencies have taken. Further testing of Bay clams was a positive step in the right directions but we feel additional testing would be helpful in determining the scope of the contamination.
Consumption guidelines are not a plan. Consider that we do not know the extent of the contamination due to inadequate testing; nor do we know the potential consequences for the members of the clam digging community who consume contaminated clams over time.
We request additional testing to determine the limits of the contamination in all of Oregon’s Bays.
In addition to our request to delineate the extent of the arsenic contamination of soft shell clams, we recommend testing razor clams to determine if they have also be contaminated by arsenic. Consumption guidelines should be considered a short term measure only. We need a long term solution to the problem. Including the recognition of the impact on the social implications of our economy and culture. Thank you for your consideration, Bill
|
|