Noosa fish deformities continue to raise questions
Just how healthy is the Noosa River? Image: greghardwick.com.au
Despite the constant high ratings awarded to the Noosa River's water quality in the Healthy Waterways Reports, fish kills and deformities have brought the spotlight firmly upon local macadamia farmers. In particular, the fungicides and pesticides used on their crops.
After the release of an interim report into fish kills and deformities at the Sunland Fish Hatchery near Boreen Point, Matthew Landos, an honorary lecturer and research associate at the University of Sydney was recently reported as saying: "The interim report highlights that agrichemicals are likely, and in my opinion highly likely, to be causally associated with the syndromes reported at Sunland Fish Hatchery".
Crop Life Australia goes so far as to not only dismiss Mr Landos's claims, but they also believe he is lying.
"Claims by activist green veterinarian Matt Landos regarding chemical causing deformities in fish larvae, are irresponsible, will harm legitimate Australian farmers and are blatant lies."
However, if Mr Landos is correct, harming "legitimate Australian farmers", will be the least of our concerns.
Although the report is yet to be finalised, local residents should be eagerly awaiting its outcomes.
For years local councils and environment groups have hailed Noosa River as the benchmark for clean and healthy river water in south-east Queensland.
Experts agree that the river is fortunate to have most of its upper sub-catchments contained within a national park. The Cooloola National Park, with its vast areas of coastal heathland, acts as a large, undisturbed natural sand filter.
Local environment groups and the former Noosa Council have, for many years, been active in protecting and enhancing a river system contained within an area now known as the Noosa Biosphere.
In the mid 90s, catchment groups were established across the state, each containing more than 20 representatives from government, industry and the local community.
Agricultural organisations were well represented on the group established to manage the Noosa River's catchment area -- initially known as the Noosa River Catchment Coordinating Committee and now known as the Noosa Integrated Catchment Association. For most of its early history, the catchment group was led by local farmers. This was seen as a good way of ensuring fairness in decision making.
In 2001 a taxpayer-funded catchment strategy was released. It showed an extensive range of existing and potential impacts threatening the river, and an equally extensive range of possible solutions.
A late 2008 image of a two-head bass embryo from the Noosa River. (Sunland Fish Hatchery - Gwen Gilson)
Although agriculture was deemed to contain varying degrees of impacts -- mostly in the form of vegetation loss and sediment run-off, the focus turned towards the relatively highly-populated lower-catchment areas. These were within the estuarine parts of the river system, which housed settlements from Tewantin to Noosa Heads. All organisations represented on the catchment group publicly agreed with, and supported this approach.
Although the focus of action was diverted away from the agricultural areas of the catchment, fish kills and deformities must surely ring alarm bells. After all, many stakeholders have made huge and often voluntary contributions towards the health of the catchment.
If the final report directly links agrichemicals to the fish deaths, just how wide spread is the problem? (The final report is not due until February 2010).
Whether or not the impacts of agricultural chemicals are clearly understood, how serious have some farmers been in protecting the river catchment by minimising spray drift and run-off in accordance with industry best practices? (The neighbouring macadamia farm bordering the fish hatchery, according to the interim report, "is considered to be operating under industry best practice guidelines").
One thing is certain, a river catchment, is the sum of its parts. If one part is impacted by chemicals, then the entire system is degraded. And it's not only the local environment that suffers.
Greg Hardwick is a freelance journalist and Environment Scientist
Below is an article from the Queensland Greens and an interesting video clip explaining the impacts upon the Sunland Fish Hatchery.
***
The Queensland Greens have taken up the cause of Gwen Gilson, the fish hatchery owner from the Sunshine Coast who has reported fish kills and deformed fish among her stock, reportedly from chemical spraying at the neighbouring macadamia farm.
Gwen breeds native fish fingerlings, including silver perch, yellow belly and bass for release into dams and waterways.
Greens spokesperson Libby Connors visited the Sunland Fish Hatchery near Lake Cootharaba north of Noosa recently to discuss the issue with Ms Gilson. Gwen's fish farm is bordered on three sides by a macadamia farm and has Cooloothin Creek at the bottom of her hill.
In 2006 there was a total fish kill after spray drift from the macadamia farm and more followed. Gwen's microscope also showed dying fish larvae, some spinning out of control and others with two heads (see image). Complaints to the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries found the macadamia farm was using pesticides allowed by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) and the farm's spray log was in order.
After Gwen sought help late last year in the aquaculture magazine Hatchery International, agricultural veterinarian, Matt Landos, came to the farm and carried out tests. He identified three chemicals being used - Carbendazim, a fungicide with suspected hormone disrupting effects, Endosulfan, a highly controversial organochloride insecticide and Methidathione, a highly toxic organosphosphate insecticide also linked to deformities.
Endosulfan is well known for its disastrous effects on aquatic life but Landos identified Carbendazim as the one most likely to be causing the deformities. It has been identified by the European Commission as being likely to affect hormone function and to be linked to fish deformities. Unfortunately, the testing of chemicals on fish larvae is not a requirement of the APVMA. Carnedazim was de-registered by the USA in 2001 because of concerns about reproductive effects in humans.
The Queensland State Government has set up a task force to examine these incidents and the APVMA is reviewing Carbendazim but the probability of bureaucratic inertia winning the day is very high. Libby Connors wants State and Federal Government to act more decisively.
She is calling for:
- updated State legislation to cover insecticides and fungicides used by unlicensed ground sprayers;
- the APVMA to establish similar review process to that of the European Union with more independent testing of the effects of chemicals on fish eggs, broodfish and embryos before approval;
- the APVMA to test environmentally relevant mixtures and to test for toxicity the whole products used not only the active ingredients;
- the APVMA to test chemicals for their endocrine/hormone disrupting effects;
- all chemicals to undergo a compulsory review every three years to maintain registration.
"The Noosa [river] is regarded as having the best water quality of any river in south-east Queensland and yet the local golden-eyed mullet has disappeared entirely from the upper Noosa River and local catches of bass have almost disappeared," Dr Connors said.
"Also, all local residents including the township of Boreen Point have rain water tanks. This is an important issue for the environment, human health and the economy."
Source of the above article: The Queensland Greens
Related articles:
6 Responses »
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)
'One thing is certain, a river catchment, is the sum of its parts. If one part is impacted by chemicals, then the entire system is degraded. And it's not only the local environment that suffers'.
This is the crux of the problem.
An increasing number of catchments- and drinking water catchments- are now demonstrably polluted by pesticides and adverse impacts, especially from endocrine disrupting chemicals (endosulfan, carbendazim, pyrethroids, atrazine, simazine, organophosphates, some wetting agents - the list goes on and on) are occurring at below detectable pesticide levels.
Mixture effects are not taken into account. Native wildlife sensitivities are not known. Endocrine disrupting and epigenetic effects are not taken into account with regard to toxicity to the foetus/ larval forms - that includes adverse effects on humans.
Action needs to be taken now by all levels of Government to stop further pollution and poisoning of lifesystems.
Alison Bleaney, have you actually read the report? From page 2:
"To-date no definitive diagnosis has been found for any of the six identified syndromes despite a comprehensive investigation. Only two of the samples taken have tested positive for any chemical contaminants (one fish feed sample from the Hatchery (tested in December 2008) and one environmental sample from Cooloothin Creek (tested in May 2009)). Neither of these can readily be linked as cause/effect to the syndromes listed at this stage."
So while the report says that its possibly caused by chemical use, there is no evidence to suggest that this is what occurred.
As stated in the article "if" one part is impacted by chemicals, the whole system is degraded. Lets wait and see if there's ANY evidence of that before pointing fingers.
Sure, I've read the article. And I also know that many things directly cause adverse effects but are difficult to prove by direct evidence; an example of this is smoking and lung cancer, or the pedestrian injured at the side of the road in a hit and run.
But to get back to water catchments and pesticides, which by definition kill living cells. The pesticides used in the catchments and so far detailed are endocrine disruptors. These include atrazine and other triazines, endosulfan, carbendazim, synthetic pyrethroids, nonyl-phenols; the list goes on. These pesticides are often detected only in small quantities if the water samples are taken after spraying and are taken in association with spraying.But the Endocrine Society, a highly respected international medical society of over 14,000 members in 100 countries, issued a seminal new report stating that exposures to endocrine disrupting chemicals are a growing threat to human health and well-being. This also extends to all animals similarly exposed in the ecosystem. The report explicitly states that “the precautionary principle is critical to enhancing health.” It also states “...infinitesimally low levels of exposure – indeed, any level of exposure at all – may cause endocrine or reproductive abnormalities, particularly if exposure occurs during a critical developmental window. Surprisingly, low doses may even exert more potent effects than higher doses.” Effects may also be transgenerational, transmitted through changes in gene function. The problem is that detection levels are above 'infinitesimally low levels of exposure '. There are pesticides in the catchment; that is beyond doubt and there have been adverse impacts..So lets see all of the evidence, including the observational and circumstantial, all of the spray plans used for all pesticides and wetting agents from that entire area. Circummstantial evidence and indirect evidence may have to be used.That's how a major crime investigation operates, isn't it? Police forensics use as much science as possible over as wide an area as they can!
APVMA put this out as a ’Hot Topic’
“Further event at the Sunland Fish Hatchery near Noosa
10 July 2009
The APVMA has been advised of a further event at the Sunland Fish Hatchery near Noosa where wild fish caught from the Noosa River produced embryos showing abnormal cell division.
Spray drift of agricultural chemicals has been ruled out as a cause by Queensland authorities.
The issue is being investigated and will be considered by the Noosa Fish Health Investigation Taskforce.
The APVMA will continue to liaise with the Taskforce.
For further comment contact Dr Simon Cubit, Manager (Public Affairs), Ph 02 6210 4869
Media statement from the Minister for Primary Industries, Fisheries and Rural and Regional Queensland - Taskforce to examine fresh case of Noosa fish abnormalities (external site).”
The Minister and DPI have released details of this recent ‘deformity event’ before there has been any investigation or verification by DPI. How can this be?
The APVMA has released a statement, again claiming no agvet chemicals involved and on the basis of no factual input. What on earth is our national regulator playing at? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!
Increasingly the APVMA is sounding like a strident lobbyist for the chemical companies.
Water and food users beware!
In July /August 2009 the EPA did water tests on the Noosa River System and found widespread chemical contamination. There were 9 passive samplers put in this river system. 7 out of the 9 registered Carbendazim an 1 sample in the middle of Lake Cootharaba registered Endosulfan Sulphate.
Further testing was done in December 09 but that is being kept secret, and I hear more testing has been ordered.
Add the 2 and 3 tailed Noosa Sea Mullet embryos discovered July 09 to the 2 headed Noosa Australian Bass in August 08 and one does not have to be a rocket scientist to know what caused these severe mutations.
For the last 3 consective sprayings on the macadamia farm in 2009 around my hatchery, the residents along Gilson Rd had their water tanks tested and all tanks and 1 swimming pool registered positive to the chemicals the macadamia farm sprayed.
Crop Life Australia, you owe Dr Matt Landos an apology!
In February 2010 the APVMA released a press release, stating they have now banned the use on Carbendazim on many food items including Turf. However they still consider it is still safe to spray Carbendazim on Macadamia nuts. When one does not normally eat Turf, it defies common sense that it is safe to eat Carbendazim sprayed Macadamia Nuts.
Carbendazim has deformed human babies overseas, and I suspect many other countries banned it's use because they feel the risk is not acceptable. Surely Australian people and animals are very similar to overseas people and animals and could be similarly adversely affected by Carbendazim?
Remember the deformed 2 headed Noosa River Austalian Bass followed by the Noosa River Sea Mullet with 2 and 3 tails and Carbendazim and Endosulfan Sulphate are testing positive in the Noosa River System.