"Dead fish" pics in gallery? - Page 2 - Newbrunswickfishing.com Site Stuff - New Brunswick Fishing

Jump to content


Photo

"Dead fish" pics in gallery?


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21 Homebrew76

Homebrew76

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 651 posts
  • LocationQuispamsis

Posted 29 January 2014 - 06:35 PM

This has gotten way off topic, but in response to skeeterpro's report of the government statement on mercury:

 

Sooooo..... should anyone with young kids catch a Striper this year and decide to keep it.... don't feed any of it to your kids?   I'm not buying it.  

 

Funny they don't mention sturgeon.   The legal size is nearly 48 inches.    Ones legal to keep, must be full of mercury according to this!

 

It may be ignorant of me, but I'm not going to abstain from keeping a meal for my family once in a while, especially if it's the kids that catch the fish.   Nothing makes them more proud (and hooked into fishing at a young age) than to be able to claim ownership for catching the family meal a couple times a year.


  • 0

Cheers,
joe

 

NB Kayak Fishing Blog
NB Kayak Fishing on Facebook

Greater Saint John Kayak Anglers  <-- Join us if you canoe or kayak fish around Greater Saint John!!

Want to catch a sturgeon?   Contact me for information on Guided Recreational Kayak Fishing in the Greater Saint John area, specializing in sturgeon fishing!

 


#22 Brent

Brent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Locationrusagonis

Posted 29 January 2014 - 08:37 PM

It may be ignorant of me, but I'm not going to abstain from keeping a meal for my family once in a while, especially if it's the kids that catch the fish.   Nothing makes them more proud (and hooked into fishing at a young age) than to be able to claim ownership for catching the family meal a couple times a year.


Not ignorant at all. It makes you a good dad. And it acknowledges the fundamentally predatory nature of fishing.
brent
  • 0

#23 Stroover

Stroover

    Streamside Pro Staff ><(((*>

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2366 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:48 PM

Homebrew, it's not simply about the size of the fish (i.e.-sturgeon being naturally long). It's that the bigger the fish for its species, the older it is. And the older it is, the longer it has had to accumulate mercury in its body. Anyway, my take on it is we all gotta go someday, nobody's getting out alive. So, might as well go down in style! :P


  • 0


 


#24 lobsterman

lobsterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • LocationMoncton

Posted 29 January 2014 - 11:28 PM

I think you're are reading waaaay, waaaaay too much into these things, which are written by lawyers, for lawyers, designed purely for keeping lawyers employed.

I find it difficult to believe anyone is seriously worried about this. Like, really? And you eat farmed salmon?????? 

 

EDIT: After re-reading my post, it sounds combative. Sorry, I was trying to be funny. And I failed miserably. My apologies for the snarky tone. It was totally unintentional. DOH!


  • 0

#25 Retroboy

Retroboy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • LocationSaint John

Posted 30 January 2014 - 01:04 PM

WHAT WHY YOU HEY YOU WANNA GO OR WHAT COME ON YOU AND ME OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW I'LL SHOW YOU YA BETTER CALL A AMBENANCE TO PICK UP THE PIECES GET YOUR LAWYER TO UPDATE YOUR WILL TOO BECAUSE YOUR NEXT OF KIN WILL NEED A TOOTHBRUSH TO PICK UP WHATEVER'S LEFT OF YA WHEN I GET THROUGH IT'S GLOVES OFF MAN GLOVES OFF YOU'RE GONNA BE A YARDSALE IF YOU TRY N GET A PIECE A ME

 

(that's how it's done. :)   )

 

Your point is actually very valid though, and I'd considered posting something similar (although maybe stated a bit differently) myself. There's a legitimate health risk to certain parts of the population that might be eating lots of New Brunswick wild fish. But if it were seriously bad for you the recommendation would be more like 'don't eat unless in a state of dire need' or something like that. This isn't like smoking where the gubmint makes a passel of cash off taxes every time an unhealthy pack of cigs is sold. This is just them having a fallback position to say "see we told you!" if someone tries to sue the government because nobody ever warned them of the health risks of long-term mercury contamination.

 

I'm thinking that levels would have reduced over time due to better industrial emissions control down in the US. I don't know if mercury fallout would have reduced over time in the same way that acid rain is no longer the problem that it was years ago, but it seems reasonable that with less air pollution comes less inbound mercury while the stuff that's already in the ecosystem gradually washes or precipitates out.


  • 0

#26 delete

delete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 06:20 PM

You'd have to eat no more than 11.62lbs of striped bass per year to stay below the safe eating limit of .5ppm.  That's 3.5 oz per week assuming striped bass in the SJR have 1.5ppm  (it's actually higher, around 1.7ppm)

 

I keep two a year around 10-15lbs and usually give a little away. I would guess maybe 6-8lbs of meat out these fish after they are filleted. That's about all you'd want to consume.... this is for adults, not pregnant women or children! 

 

Follow the guidelines or you'll be hurting your children because you think the government is "lying" to you about mercury levels in fish.

Make sure your wife is well informed about mercury contamination before you go ahead and "stick it" to the man by feeding your children an unsafe amount of fish.  It's your right to harm your own health, but not your right to do it to your children.


  • 0

#27 Retroboy

Retroboy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • LocationSaint John

Posted 30 January 2014 - 07:47 PM

Good information in that post, and you are right, the government is warning us for a reason. But I have to comment on the phrase "safe eating limits".

 

Some people smoke a pack a day and live until they're a great-grandparent, others inhale second-hand smoke and become tragically ill of lung conditions before they experience anything close to their full life. Tobacco is a roll of the cosmic dice.

 

And mercury in foodstuffs is similar. There's no hard point at which it becomes suddenly dangerous when it wasn't before and an alarm goes off that tells you to stop. Even the guidelines in the 2013 fishing guide say "An occasional meal which exceeds the guidelines should have no adverse health effects" (that's a quote).

 

It's an increasing probability curve as the amount eaten over time rises, with young people having a higher chance of negative effects occurring in their lifetime if they keep eating more.

 

So what's the government choosing as the point where it's "safe"? It's most likely that some medical person picked a number somewhere in the middle based on an acceptably low number of people that get sick over time and an acceptably high number of people that don't. But it's no guarantee that even if you only eat one mouthful of wild fish that you won't suffer some bad effect.

 

So I don't go plowing my kids full of wild fish, but I also don't ban it forever from their diet. I'm rolling those cosmic dice a little, yes. But I also do that every time I get behind the wheel.


  • 0

#28 delete

delete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 10:19 PM

I don't agree with your theory.   The number is based on animal testing and research done on humans who have diseases/cancers and their mercury levels etc.    At or above the given number, higher than normal probabilities of becoming sick occur. No average numbers. I would never feed my kids striped bass, even if the exposure is acceptable weighted over time. Not all the side effects are immediately noticeable or measureable, just like many other toxins we ingest frequently. You simply have to look at the types and frequencies of diseases/disorders compared globally and socio-economically to understand that there are a lot of things not fully understood or ignored in our diets/water/air that severely effect our health. Everything from household cleaners, lawn care products etc can be very bad for us. I'm not a hippie, don't get me wrong, but people should really spend some time reading up on these sort of things (from reliable sources of course)   It is scary what people don't know about exposure to certain chemicals and other toxins.  We fishermen get exposed to a lot of stuff especially lead. I can remember it being common practice to pinch your split shot with your teeth.... I know one guy who used to even hold a few extra in his mouth while fishing!  The white chalky dust lead weights produce over time is even worse.  

 

Striped bass are probably the fattiest fish I can think of. I've kept a few 30pounders in the past that were absolute pigs and were full of fat. The fat is were most toxins (PCBs Mercury etc) are stored in a fish. 

 

To all those people who say, their great grandmother lived to 102 and smoked two packs a day.... just think how much longer and healthier they would have lived without those two packs a day.  It's all about quality over quantity.  Hacking and coughing until your 102 doesn't make it worth while. The vast majority of smokers will get sick sooner vs later.  Same with people who eat way too many fish with high mercury levels. As the mercury builds up in either your brain or kidneys (for example) and you get dementia and/or kidney failure, what are you going to blame? Smoking? Air pollution? Bad genes? .... truth is there is no person or thing to blame because who really knows what the exact cause is as there are many. But you can prevent or prolong getting sick by educating yourself on how to reduce the risks. Following Health Canada's guidelines is a good start.

 

We are paying now for our parent's pollution. Just as our children and their children will be paying for ours. It takes a long time for toxins to get out of the food chain. A lot of this stuff damages our genetics, that's a fact, but when people get sick we can't trace it back to a specific source(s), so there's no one to blame, thus no harm no foul by the polluters and the cycle continues.  A certain area of Saint John has 3% higher cancer rates... this area is in the vicinity of a large industrial site. A local school has been closed because of fumes from this site on occasion. The fumes are very toxic, some instantly deadly in high concentrations. When the fumes are very bad, they use a deodorant spray system hidden behind the local neighborhood to mask it.  People are crazy to live there. That tells you that many people ignore clear and present health risks due to ignorance, misinformation or lack of knowledge.

 

 

To keep my reply somewhat on topic... Chose wisely the size, type and amount of fish you eat and from where you catch them. Most fish are better off put back in the water anyways!  For example,  Cooke's will sometimes tell you not to eat wild fish caught near their cages if they are treating their fish. Almost all the striped bass at the falls hang out directly in the outflow of the pulp mill and like hanging around sewage pipes due to the warm water and baitfish it attracts.  Point Lepreau puts out cooling water with radioactive tritium particles and again, many fish are attracted to this warm water (even sub-tropical species can be found there!) Enjoy your meal! ;)  


  • 0

#29 Retroboy

Retroboy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • LocationSaint John

Posted 31 January 2014 - 05:18 AM

Bigfish, nothing in your post really disagrees with what's in mine. In a lot of ways you and I are saying the exact same thing. The only real difference is that the numbers you point out - 11.62 pounds, 0.5 parts per million - aren't some hard transition point. If it's not safe to eat 11.62 pounds, certainly it's not any 'safer' to eat 11.63 or 12, or even 30. But that number does not mean in any way that it's automatically safe to eat 10 pounds either, or even five pounds, or any amount at all. My point was more about a selected number mapping precisely to a point at which bad things happen. Even with mercury, it doesn't work that way for any individual - it trends to over the population.

 

We may have a difference of opinion about the tolerance of risk that we choose to accept (or perhaps for some, choose or do not choose to remain completely ignorant of) for ourselves and those around us. For me it's balancing quality of life against the odds that something I'm doing will negatively impact myself and those around me.

 

Examples: I live in Saint John and, although I am aware of and live well away from the industrial site you mention, I've lost distant acquaintances to lung conditions that are likely caused by air pollution and know there's a slightly higher chance that I will develop lung cancer because I'm living anywhere near the city at all. But that's a chance I take because it keeps me and my kids close to my retired parent, my only brother and his family, and a job and co-workers that I greatly like. As for fishing at all, my spouse is much more risk-intolerant than I am and just sighs and ensures that my life insurance policy is up to date every time I go kayaking alone, or rolls her eyes and wonders why the he** she married me when I recount my latest adventures with some of the others on this forum. But she knows my existence would be much more drab and I would be much less happy without that element of my life. 

 

Your points about higher pollutant levels in certain species are very well taken, and again, good info in your post. 


  • 0

#30 delete

delete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 09:02 AM

I think what Health Canada means is that you can eat 3.5oz per week of striped bass every week of your adult life (as long as your not prego) and remain below the acceptable level of mercury in your body... that is given you don't intake mercury from other sources! Of course you will though.    If you over consume mercury laden foods,your bio accumulation of mercury will be above what is considered safe and you will be affected...noticeably or not. The type of mercury in fish is easily absorbed in the digestive system. You could swallow all the mercury from a thermometer and not have any dangerous amount show up in your system. Burn it and inhale the vapors and it's a different story.

 

There was a big problem in Iraq with mercury contaminated grains and the Japanese have high levels of mercury due to all the seafood they eat.  They just want to fight in Iraq (irritability/aggressiveness is a symptom of mercury poisoning)  and if you've  watched Anthony Bourdain Parts Unknown, apparently the Japanese are crazy about Manga (cartoon porn with octopi etc) .....all good reasons to be wary of mercury! :D hehehehe


  • 0

#31 Mikkmann

Mikkmann

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • LocationRiverview NB

Posted 31 January 2014 - 11:25 AM

Good day;

 

The form of mercury found in fish is methylmercury, which is actually the liquid metallic form of mercury. If you wish to decrease your intake of mercury while still consuming bass, then do what has already been mentioned and stick to consuming smaller legal size fish, as larger fish have had more time for the mercury to bioaccumulate in their tissues. Also, mercury tends to accumulate more in the fatty portions of the fish, so remove all red meat and do not consume the fatty belly flap. Cut your fillet from the shoulder and cut over the ribs.  There was a laboratory study done in Massachsetts that showed by keeping to smaller legal fish and filleting them in this manner, mercury levels were decreased by up to 75 %. Having said this, I am not advocating that anyone exceed the Health Canada Guidelines for bass consumption; I am simply providing this information for those who wish to continue consuming bass, and would also like to do all they can to lessen mercury intake.


  • 1

#32 sdavis

sdavis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 532 posts
  • LocationFredericton, NB

Posted 01 February 2014 - 04:54 PM

I don't agree with your theory.   The number is based on animal testing and research done on humans who have diseases/cancers and their mercury levels etc.    At or above the given number, higher than normal probabilities of becoming sick occur. No average numbers. I would never feed my kids striped bass, even if the exposure is acceptable weighted over time. Not all the side effects are immediately noticeable or measureable, just like many other toxins we ingest frequently. You simply have to look at the types and frequencies of diseases/disorders compared globally and socio-economically to understand that there are a lot of things not fully understood or ignored in our diets/water/air that severely effect our health. Everything from household cleaners, lawn care products etc can be very bad for us. I'm not a hippie, don't get me wrong, but people should really spend some time reading up on these sort of things (from reliable sources of course)   It is scary what people don't know about exposure to certain chemicals and other toxins.  We fishermen get exposed to a lot of stuff especially lead. I can remember it being common practice to pinch your split shot with your teeth.... I know one guy who used to even hold a few extra in his mouth while fishing!  The white chalky dust lead weights produce over time is even worse.  

 

Striped bass are probably the fattiest fish I can think of. I've kept a few 30pounders in the past that were absolute pigs and were full of fat. The fat is were most toxins (PCBs Mercury etc) are stored in a fish. 

 

To all those people who say, their great grandmother lived to 102 and smoked two packs a day.... just think how much longer and healthier they would have lived without those two packs a day.  It's all about quality over quantity.  Hacking and coughing until your 102 doesn't make it worth while. The vast majority of smokers will get sick sooner vs later.  Same with people who eat way too many fish with high mercury levels. As the mercury builds up in either your brain or kidneys (for example) and you get dementia and/or kidney failure, what are you going to blame? Smoking? Air pollution? Bad genes? .... truth is there is no person or thing to blame because who really knows what the exact cause is as there are many. But you can prevent or prolong getting sick by educating yourself on how to reduce the risks. Following Health Canada's guidelines is a good start.

 

We are paying now for our parent's pollution. Just as our children and their children will be paying for ours. It takes a long time for toxins to get out of the food chain. A lot of this stuff damages our genetics, that's a fact, but when people get sick we can't trace it back to a specific source(s), so there's no one to blame, thus no harm no foul by the polluters and the cycle continues.  A certain area of Saint John has 3% higher cancer rates... this area is in the vicinity of a large industrial site. A local school has been closed because of fumes from this site on occasion. The fumes are very toxic, some instantly deadly in high concentrations. When the fumes are very bad, they use a deodorant spray system hidden behind the local neighborhood to mask it.  People are crazy to live there. That tells you that many people ignore clear and present health risks due to ignorance, misinformation or lack of knowledge.

 

 

To keep my reply somewhat on topic... Chose wisely the size, type and amount of fish you eat and from where you catch them. Most fish are better off put back in the water anyways!  For example,  Cooke's will sometimes tell you not to eat wild fish caught near their cages if they are treating their fish. Almost all the striped bass at the falls hang out directly in the outflow of the pulp mill and like hanging around sewage pipes due to the warm water and baitfish it attracts.  Point Lepreau puts out cooling water with radioactive tritium particles and again, many fish are attracted to this warm water (even sub-tropical species can be found there!) Enjoy your meal! ;)  

 

I was reading this agreeing with you for the most part, but then the end really made me not trust anything else you wrote. 'sewer pipe' outfall I would drink it right in front of you it's that clean (unless they are having a problem at that particular time of course - but generally speaking the water is clean). I would drink 'sewage pipe water' before drinking water from the river itself, but that's a complicated reason. The water discharge is warmer, but clean.

 

There is no discharge water from Point Lepreau. Stop spreading scare misinformation. The cooling system is a closed loop water system, similar to the radiator system in a hot water heating system in your home, a radiator system in your car, etc. There is no discharge whatsoever. Any radioactive waste is stored nearby above ground in thick concrete containers that do not allow any radiation to be emitted. The waste produced in the past 30years is insignificant, you would be surprised at how little space it takes up. There is no radiation emitted from Point Lepreau or any other nuclear power plant in the world.

 

PS - i'm a civil engineering consultant who has designed sewage treatment plants and has worked at point lepreau.


  • 0

#33 sdavis

sdavis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 532 posts
  • LocationFredericton, NB

Posted 01 February 2014 - 05:35 PM

to get back on topic, I wish moderators would verify every photo submitted and determine from the beginning (there is not that many photo submissions on this site to make this exercise erroneous), if a photo is acceptable or not, and not simply rely on user complaints. the longer a questionable photo stays up before a complaint is submitted, the more controversy builds. 


  • 0

#34 Chadman

Chadman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 576 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern New Brunswick

Posted 01 February 2014 - 06:06 PM

I emailed the owner of the site earlier this week asking about this topic.. and got the same reply as the previous owner for other items i had inquired on... not one reply back, not even an email to acknowledge the damn question or even to say that he is not the person to ask with details of who I should be contacting..... frustrating for the user that's for sure! 


  • 0

#35 Homebrew76

Homebrew76

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 651 posts
  • LocationQuispamsis

Posted 01 February 2014 - 06:12 PM

I'm sure... or at least suspect, the moderator is a volunteer position that pays less in respect and thanks than most volunteer positions would receive.   Moderating an online forum mean operating in about as grey an area as it comes, and everything is a judgement call.  It can't be easy, and it's not something I'd want to be responsible for.

 

As such, my suggestion is that if you see something that offends you, then report it.  If you see something you personally don't have a problem with but you think might break the rules, then report it as such or leave it alone.  Outside of that, let it be.


  • 0

Cheers,
joe

 

NB Kayak Fishing Blog
NB Kayak Fishing on Facebook

Greater Saint John Kayak Anglers  <-- Join us if you canoe or kayak fish around Greater Saint John!!

Want to catch a sturgeon?   Contact me for information on Guided Recreational Kayak Fishing in the Greater Saint John area, specializing in sturgeon fishing!

 


#36 Chadman

Chadman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 576 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern New Brunswick

Posted 01 February 2014 - 06:16 PM

ya my email was to the site owner, not to the moderator.. the moderator can only work within the guidelines.. my question is outside the guidelines thus the email to the site owner, with no reply back to me


  • 0

#37 delete

delete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 07:12 PM

I was reading this agreeing with you for the most part, but then the end really made me not trust anything else you wrote. 'sewer pipe' outfall I would drink it right in front of you it's that clean (unless they are having a problem at that particular time of course - but generally speaking the water is clean). I would drink 'sewage pipe water' before drinking water from the river itself, but that's a complicated reason. The water discharge is warmer, but clean.

 

There is no discharge water from Point Lepreau. Stop spreading scare misinformation. The cooling system is a closed loop water system, similar to the radiator system in a hot water heating system in your home, a radiator system in your car, etc. There is no discharge whatsoever. Any radioactive waste is stored nearby above ground in thick concrete containers that do not allow any radiation to be emitted. The waste produced in the past 30years is insignificant, you would be surprised at how little space it takes up. There is no radiation emitted from Point Lepreau or any other nuclear power plant in the world.

 

PS - i'm a civil engineering consultant who has designed sewage treatment plants and has worked at point lepreau.

[q];++d){var>[q]+d[q])break;a+=d}b=!0}this.e&&(d=x+e(json.stringify(this.h())),131072>[q];++b)for(var>

The sewage treatment systems you design may discharge very clean water, but not the majority of those that run into Saint John harbour...those are the ones I'm talking about and they've have been around along time...nothing more than a big pipe. If you'd like to drink that water go ahead, just be careful not to choke on a condom or pad! Even the sewage treatment facility upstream releases large "ice bergs" of toilet paper and everything else mixed in.    I've also worked on lots of industrial sites, I can tell you very few if any are as environmentally responsible as they claim to be. There are cover ups and "let's get this done before Environment Canada comes in tomorrow, we told them this was done last year"  type of rush jobs.  I especially like the ones where you have to wear SCBA and not make sparks!  ;)

 

I have worked on the cooling water lines for Lepreau, they do discharge into the bay and there is tritium in that water....its a fact jack....

"Tritium continues to be the only radionuclide released by Point Lepreau that was

detected in the environment during this time period.

 

Small increases in the tritium activity in air for AMS 5 located in Digby N.S.

indicate that there is some transport of radioactivity across the Bay of Fundy of no

ecological or human health risk."

http://www.dfo-mpo.g...rary/261283.pdf

 

I'm not fear mongering, I'm stating the facts and some people don't like them. Do whatever you want because many people will just do the opposite of what they're told anyways.

 

  Keep eating your tilapia, shrimp, mussels, oysters and baby clams raised in sewer water in Vietnam, Thailand, China etc too. http://www.snopes.co...ngs/tilapia.asp   http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

 

 

We all have to be careful about what  DEAD FISH we consume, wild or farmed.

 

 

I say keep things they way they were, no dead fish. There are too many people out there that will kill a fish or their limit just to get a picture. I know I've done it as a kid, but have realized the errors of my ways.   I've had pictures taken down because of having a hand on the gill plate of a 4 foot striper that was very alive and swam away. Dave thought my hand was in the gills, which it was not. Meanwhile worse photos were posted than that and photos of guys at the boat launch with striped bass they obviously kept and/or were dead.


  • 0

#38 sdavis

sdavis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 532 posts
  • LocationFredericton, NB

Posted 01 February 2014 - 10:15 PM

I do concur that not all of SJ's sewage is treated before discharging it. A much large percentage then other areas, especially for a city it's size. A shameful truth that the City needs to address. But PS - it is against the law to dispose of sanitary napkins and condoms in the sewer system - although that does not stop some from doing so.

 

from the document you posted Bighfish 1.... it is funny what you decide to quote from the document and what you decide to not quote. Read it and interpret as you may, but this text is exclude from your quote above despite being in the same sentence! "levels are significantly below those considered harmful to organisms.", Tritium is also naturally occurring, and is safely used in many consumer products that we use on a daily basis. The report itself concludes no harmful emissions from Point Lepreau, yet you post it hoping nobody reads it?

 

Besides. The increases are water vapour, (which are still well under permitted levels to cause any harm: 'at or below detection level' is quote from the report)  not discharged into the water. The fact remains that there is no discharge from the cooling system as you state.. jack?

 

As far as your comment on talipia, mussels, oysters and baby clams, I will be sure to release any Vietnameise, thai, and chinese versions from your example that I angle her in NB. thanks for the warning.

 

And you claim not to be fear mongering?


  • 0

#39 Jim VE9WH

Jim VE9WH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1326 posts
  • LocationSaint John, NB

Posted 01 February 2014 - 10:46 PM

The city is supposed to complete it harbour cleanup this year, which means no more raw sewage being dumped into the river or harbour.
  • 0

Jim VE9WH


#40 Stroover

Stroover

    Streamside Pro Staff ><(((*>

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2366 posts

Posted 02 February 2014 - 07:43 AM

This thread kind of got a little off-topic, no?


  • 0


 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users