wabamum will be open for keeping fish?

[coyotezh]

lots of people talking about it now. Is it true? This lake can host lots of people who want to keep fish, I guess!

[sns2]

Where'd you hear that?

[RavYak]

It should be opened up briefly but I doubt it will be.

[chriscosta]

You'd hafta be crazy to eat fish from there when there's so many lakes around with keep able fish that aren't contaminated ...you'd almost be hard pressed for a keeper anyway lol

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by chriscosta

You'd hafta be crazy to eat fish from there when there's so many lakes around with keep able fish that aren't contaminated ...you'd almost be hard pressed for a keeper anyway lol

Didn't they just do testing and found that Wab is one of the cleanest lakes going?

[Lefty-Canuck]

If it ever opens up I think it will be draw tags only.

LC

[DiabeticKripple]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

If it ever opens up I think it will be draw tags only.

LC

im okay with that.

then they can manage the population of fish, and it wont get decimated

[huntingaddict]

When the chemical spill happened they said it would be 25 Yrs min before it would be considered safe for eating if your willing to eat anything there's always fish in sask river Goodluck

[neilsledder]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Didn't they just do testing and found that Wab is one of the cleanest lakes going?

Went there this past weekend and was amazed how clean the water was when it come up on the snow from drilling. Never seen it in the summer though

[RavYak]

The water is very clear and I highly doubt there is any contamination effects from the oil spill. When I was chatting with biologist it sounded like it was closed and will remain closed in order to keep it a trophy fishery, unfortunately it will probably take 10-15 years to reach a healthy equilibrium again, if it even does...

[neekrivers]

as clean as it may look, I think there are still some issues that are not being told. Last year I launched my tin boat on the south side of the lake and water was low so stepped in sand and bottom of boat drug on the sand - well after I was going along my boat was leaving a big nasty oil sheen across the lake behind me, bottom of my boat had some nasty looking **** on the sides and under the boat that was clumpy. my personal belief is they treated this like most oil spills and covered it up and didn't actually remove the oil itself. just my 2 cents.
also when ice fishing there why is the snow black? does the coal dust in the air effect marine life or our lives for that matter?

[RavYak]

From 2013 Water Quality Report

On Wednesday August 3, 2005, 46 Canadian National Railway (CN) cars derailed 7.5 km west of the Village of Wabamun. This resulted in the release of 712,500 L of Bunker ‘C’ oil and 88,000 L of Pole- Treating Oil. Bunker ‘C’ oil is the residue remaining from crude oil after the light oils, gasoline, naphtha, fuel oil #l, and fuel oil #2 have been fractioned off. The Bunker ‘C’ oil that remains after this separation is predominantly comprised of heavy hydrocarbons. Pole-Treating Oil is used in wood treating chemicals. It is estimated that 149,000 L of Bunker ‘C’ oil and only trace amounts of Pole-Treating Oil entered Wabamun Lake (Golder Associates 2006). The oil spread rapidly over the eastern and southeastern portion of the lake, strong westerly winds later in the week helped push the oil back against the shore (Anderson 2006). Unfortunately, another large storm did push the containment booms with the oil they accumulated back out into the lake, allowing some of the oil to accumulate or sink into the open water (Hugh Wollis, AESRD, personal communication). Various measures were used to remove the oil from the surface of the lake and along the shorelines.

Monitoring of water quality was conducted by Alberta Environment, focusing on the deep-water zone, from the time of the spill and into late September. Overall water and sediments in the open water area of the lake were not contaminated with spilled hydrocarbons. There also was no evidence of post-spill increase in water or sediment metal concentrations (Anderson 2006).

Assessments during the spill found that over 50% of the shoreline around the perimeter of the lake was oiled. Of the total 32,688 m of shoreline, 18,677 m was heavily oiled consisting mostly of bulrush/reed beds. The amount of oil on the reeds depended on the density of the reed beds and the height of the waves when oil was present. A multi-agency team of Environment Canada, Alberta Environment, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, and the Environmental Section of CN decided on shoreline clean-up methods and priorities. Three main clean up treatment techniques were used, manual removal, vegetation removal and natural recovery. The majority of the reed beds were cut, sediment shorelines were manually cleaned and lightly oiled areas were left to naturally recover (Sergy et al. 2009). Recovery of the oiled bulrush/reed beds was examined in the summers of 2006 and 2007. This study concluded that exposure to oil during the late growing season did not cause large scale damage to the overall health and growth of the reed beds (Wernick et al. 2009).

Golder Associates was hired by CN to design and conduct a monitoring program to assess the environmental effects of the spill. The goals of this program were to assess the potential effects of the spill on aquatic plants, animals and sediments of the lake. To do this, Golder established a weight of evidence framework to determine the long term effects to algae, macrophytes, zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, and fish. For each of these categories the weight of evidence framework considered exposure concentrations, lab effects and field effects (Golder Associates 2006).

The weight of evidence framework for algae considered water chemistry, lab toxicity of similar species and phytoplankton community structure of the lake. Experimental tests revealed that water collected from the spill site caused a decline in algae growth compared to three reference stations. No changes in the phytoplankton community were observed after the spill compared to historic data for Wabamun Lake (Golder Associates 2006).

Water chemistry, toxicity testing with native species and assessment of post spill growth were included in the weight of evidence framework for macrophytes. Experimental studies were conducted on the growth of duckweed (Lemna minor) the lab using water collected from the spill location. Experimental results showed that duckweed growth was not significantly reduced, although some reduction in frond production was observed (Golder Associates 2006).

The weight of evidence framework assessment conducted for zooplankton included toxicity of daphnia and ceriodaphina, surface water toxicity and zooplankton species taxonomy before and after the spill. Some of the oil related chemical parameters were detected in the water samples collected; however, all results were below the water quality guidelines. Experimental tests showed that survival of daphnia was 100% in spill water, suggesting that hydrocarbon concentrations were not lethal to zooplankton. Post spill zooplankton data was collected and compared to historical data for Wabamun Lake and showed no changes in community composition (Golder Associates 2006).

For assessment of the benthic community, 19 transects were established at three depths over a wide range of contaminated sites across the lake. The highest concentrations of spill related PAHs were measured at sites immediately adjacent to the spill site. However, examination of these sites after the spill showed no changes in community structure. Lab toxicity experiments showed that at least one or more organisms collected from the spill site were significantly affected by toxicity (Golder Associates 2006).

The fish component of this study was the most in depth and considered contaminant concentrations in the water and those biologically available for accumulation by fish (adults and eggs). It also examined the concentration of contaminants accumulated in fish tissue and fish bile, both in the short and long term. Laboratory tests included fish toxicity tests and in situ whitefish egg incubation studies using fish from Wabamun Lake. Concentrations of oil-related PAHs in muscle tissue and PAH metabolites in the fish bile indicated that sampled fish were exposed to oil. When the same test was repeated two months after the spill, there were no traces of PAHs found in the fish tissue or bile. Water collected from the spill site on Wabamun Lake caused a reduction in growth of fathead minnows in laboratory experiments. However, this trend was also observed in water collected from reference sites on the lake, indicating that oil was not the only factor causing this observation (Golder Associates 2006). The in-situ study of Lake Whitefish egg incubation found that some deformities did occur in white fish eggs as a result of oil spill related PAHs at sites that had high levels of contamination (Debruyn et al. 2007). However, there was no indication if this exposure would lead to any long-term effects.

Overall, results of the weight of evidence framework indicate that effects of the oil were negligible in the open-water portion of the lake, including both near shore and offshore areas. Algae and zooplankton showed little exposure and no evidence of negative effects. Fish populations showed initial exposure to PAHs, but two months later no PAHs were detected in fish tissues. There was some indication of contamination to sediments to the near shore areas of the spill (Golder Associates 2006). Overall the initial spill did not appear to significantly impact the aquatic environment of Wabamun Lake, however long term monitoring will indicate if any long-term changes have occurred.

[huntsfurfish]

[PINEHURST-PIKE-FREAK]

I watched a documentary some yrs ago about oil spills,they stated one drop of dirty oil can contaminate 10,000liters of water.The wabamun spill was like 710,000 liters approx.How can we believe or expect the fish to be safe to eat?To top it off the mercury spewing from the stacks at the power plant,then there's the human activity on and around the lake.Does anyone really believe that grandfathered 30-40yr old septic systems aren't leaking,how about the cabin owner with his gleaming lawn pumped full of fertilizer and pesticides,how about the guys spilling gas all over while filling their auger,everyones dog crapping on the ice.I could careless if they open it because I won't eat anything out of that toxic cancer pool.
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...RHu1N-aRTd52pg

[RavYak]

^Better not eat any fish from a supermarket or restaurant either then. You seen the ocean waters where many of these fish are taken from or the farms they are raised in? I would rather eat a fish out of Wab...

[Bonescreek]

No opinion ether way.

Just wanted to say I have seen a purple film on the water after pulling
up a foot in the mud in a farm pond. Oil ?
And I have seen a purple sheen flow from a dissposed oil filter in a stream.
Oil ?

They looked the same, oil comes from the ground, don't it ?

Just saying.

Only difference I can think of is Synthetic oil is different.
Plastic. So it's like uranium it has a very long half life.
And even when it gets old and docile like lead, you still would not want to eat it.