Would you eat this fish ????

[FishFreak]

Whats the consensus on eating Willamette river sturgeon. Is there a big difference between a sturgeon caught in the Columbia at Kelly Point and one caught 1/4 mile up river in the Willamette ?
Darn those PCBs....

[Chromaflage]

The way I look at it is - "The Dose Makes the Poison." Meaning, too much of a good thing can be bad for you. If I had to live on one or the other, I would choose CR sturgeon as opposed to Willy-Gators. More of a psychological issue I think. Our bio systems are very reselient to a ceratin degree. I'l probably not have a problem eating Willy Gators a couple or even a few times per month. But again, psychologically, I would opt for CR fish. I'm sure if either fish presented a significant health risk, we'd hear about it in a heart beat. And to be honest, I haven't heard much about people getting sick or dying from stugeon from either river. I do however, try to get as much of the fat, yellow and red meat off the fish as possible before eating.

My 0.02 and a half

ORS

[5-Cents]

You know that stretch of the Willamette, just up stream of the CR, is in line for a superfund cleanup! Lots of gunk on the bottom right where the good ole sturg sucks his dinner up. Throw in some sewage and... well...

Save your 5 slots this year for the Estuary. Nothing better than fresh from the ocean sturgeon! Use this upriver time to practice.

[Trophy]

it may be safer than beef

But seriously, I too would love to get my hands on any definitive study which proves or dis-proves the safety of eating sturgeon. I remember reading an article by a conservation group (Friends of the River?) a few years ago that cited the Columbia as one of the top 10 polluted rivers in the nation. And there were many many toxins and other harmful chemicals they found in the water sample. But on the other hand, I think that ODFW would not allow human consumption if the gators were that harmful :whazzup:

[STGRule]

Trophy, try

Here, here, and here.

ODFW doesn't test or make the calls, ODHS does.

[ 12-30-2003, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[ampersat]

Would you eat a springer from the Willy?

As long as you're below the dam, sturgeon are anadromous just like salmon. I'd say as long as you get them early in the season, their exposure to toxins in the river is pretty low.

After all, you're eating a bottom feeder. That's where everything nasty settles, ocean, river, lake and every other body-type of water. And they eat it. And you eat them. You are what you eat and they are what they eat so you are what they eat. It's not whether they're polluted, it's how polluted they are. That's why I don't sturgeon fish.

[Trophy]

Thanks STGRule!
I have seen similar reports...but I did learn who to contact for more information.

I would have thunk that ODHS (or some other appropriate agency) would have done autopsies on sturgies by age and by location and have published the findings of levels of various contaminants.

[Chromaflage]

Originally posted by ampersat:
Would you eat a springer from the Willy?

After all, you're eating a bottom feeder. That's where everything nasty settles, ocean, river, lake and every other body-type of water. And they eat it. And you eat them. You are what you eat and they are what they eat so you are what they eat. It's not whether they're polluted, it's how polluted they are. That's why I don't sturgeon fish.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">That is true, to a certain extent. The actual question here is how much of what types of toxins accumulate in 1. the sturgeon tissue that we eat; and 2. How much of #1 is bioavailable to humans. Both fish and humans have the ability to metabolize certain amounts and types of toxins. Most of this metabolisms occurs in the liver, which is why I do not eat liver of any kind. Furthermore, once the systems in liver become accutely overloaded, we have backup systems, one of which is our immune system, that try to take over where the liver leaves off.

Nearly all food contains chemicals and substances that have no useful function within the human body. So, it's back to the basic statement I posted earlier - "the dose makes the poison." For the most part this holds true with the exception of those things that can cause cancer. The ability of some substances to cause cancer is dose related. Then there are some substance (such as asbestos, which is not likely to be found in fish) that can cause cancer upon a single exposure.

It would be interesting to see toxicological test results on sturgeon tissue from different rivers.

Yet another 0.02 or maybe $1.00 at this point.
:grin: :grin:

ORS

[STGRule]

Trophy, part of the problem with testing by age or size is the growth rate of sturgeon. They are like people in that some of them grow fast and then top out "short", Some grow slow and top out "short". Some grow fast and top out "tall" Some grow slow and top out "tall". And then you get fish that grow fast and then slow down; some grow slow at first and then "spurt". At some point in their growth they change prey bases. Little tiny fish eat benthic invertebrates. Larger fish eat a mix of bugs and clams, at some point they start eating fish and clams. The faster growing sturgeon switch over to fish at a younger age and depending on what kind of fish they eat will probably have less contaminates than a fish that grew slower and ate more bugs and clams. The overlap in size, age and prey bases makes it very difficult to divide the risk into neat little boxes. Then you can add in the migratory habits of individual fish. Some stay in the same general area all the time, Some move seasonally, some move great distances over short periods of time. Then to complicate it even more they can change migration patterns at any point in the life cycle. Is this the fish that grew fast and spent most of its time in the ocean? Or is it the fish that grew very little and lived in the gross stuff for ten years and then went out to sea last spring and now looks like a fresh ocean fish? You can only make generalizations when it comes to sturgeon. If you are going to minimize risks, choose smaller fish from the estuary with the knowledge that doesn't guarantee you anything. Just use the information you do have and make the choice you are comfortable with.

[FishFreak]

Just an added source. The ODFW fishing regs for 2004 do list the toxins of concern for various species and also a recomended maximum consumption rate.