2008.04.03
Here we go again: Fish kill on the James is back
Scott Smith, the fisheries biologist who oversees the upper James River, said we could expect to see another fish kill this year on the James. In short, he said nothing had changed in the watershed since last year so there was no reason to expect a different outcome.
Still, it was impossible not to hope that last year was just a one-time deal. As I wrote about in my Sunday column, that hope quickly faded.
The DGIF and DEQ have announced that reports of sick and dying fish -- smallmouth bass, mostly -- have already started coming in. I guess the best we can hope for is that this year's kill, like last year's, won't be too terrible.
I got the following detailed report late yesterday from river rat Louis Tudor of Roanoke. He sent it as a comment on an entry I did last year on the fish kill, but I wanted to give it better play some I'm posting it below in full:
"I would like to report a sick fish sighting. I was fishing Buchanan to Arcadia. I put in at daybreak at the Buchanan boat ramp. Resting there was a very large smallie, well over 20”. When I reached down to to touch him he was slow to move but that he did. He was covered with fuzzy white “caterpillar” like lesions on at least four parts of his body.
I could have easily caught this fish with my hands but I let him be. After about 30 minutes he swam back into the main body of water. I caught no citation smallies last year, four the year before that, and seven two years ago. I fish a lot and am seeing fewer big fish every year. I am catching the same aount of redeyes and small fish over this same period.
I personally think that there is a correlation of a low flow rate (drought) which magnifies bad things that are obviously happenning in the river. Places where I used to catch large fish are less hospitable because the river is lower in those areas changing the dynamics of what made the area good to start with (stagnation). I hope that this is not nature's way of reducing fish population because the river itself is shrinking.
Let's face it, how many other rivers could you go to and catch over fifty fish in a day?"
If you have a report or pictures of sick or dead fish on the James (or any other river), let me know. Be sure to also send the report to the DEQ at fishreports@deq.virginia.gov.
Reading about the fish kills have got me seeking other areas to fish, speaking of which do anyone know the direction to "Thornhill Pond Fishing in Pulaski County, Virginia
Pulaski Area"
Starting point Christiansburg
Comment by Backlash — April 3, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
Backlash,
I've never heard of Thornhill Pond. Good luck.
As for the fish kills, don't let them scare you off. There's no evidence the kills impact human health, and biologist Scott Smith said he doesn't think angling pressure will have a major impact on mortality.
Also, the New River has not had the problems. And with the New in your backyard, you really don't have much reason to travel to the James anyway.
mt
Comment by Mark Taylor — April 3, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
Mark - are the DGIF folks worried at all about this thing spreading to the New or Staunton River systems??
Comment by Scott — April 3, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Mark,
You may be right by recommending that we need not worry about these potential fish kills since they don't directly affect us. Still, I think we should be troubled by the increasing number of fish kills in our state's waters. Even if the New isn't affected now, that doesn't give us an excuse to put these kills out of sight and out of mind. What is in the James or Shenandoah rivers now won't take long to repeat in other waters. We should be concerned by troubling symptoms before we are confronted with an epidemic.
Comment by Hank — April 3, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
Hank,
Sorry if my last comment wasn't clear. In no way did I mean to imply that we shouldn't worry about the fish kills. We should worry, which is why the original entry included the line "hope it was just a one-time deal."
By stating that the kills don't impact human health, I mean that if you go fishing on the James and see or even handle dead or sick fish, there's no evidence that you could become ill as a result. If that were the case we'd have a lot of sick scientists and fisheries biologists on our hands.
On a large scale, the implications are far more worrisome. One could argue that a sick river is a symptom of a problem that may very well eventually have a ripple effect on humans.
So, yes, we should worry. And we should hope that scientists are able to figure out what's causing these problems as soon as possible so an effort can be made to alleviate that cause or causes.
As for worry about other systems, Scott, biologists haven't told me specifically that they fear this problem will continue to spread or that they expect it to occur in another specific body of water. But there can be little doubt that they are concerned and closely monitoring rivers around the state.
A lot of attention has been given to traits these affected watersheds have in common -- and what they don't have in common with as-of-yet unaffected watersheds -- as the experts try to connect the dots.
But finding commonalities is only part of the challenge. Ultimately, the scientists need to identify the specific compound (or compounds) that are weakening the immune systems of these fish.
Then comes the next challenge: keeping that crap out of the rivers. And that's certainly not going to happen quickly or without serious effort and pain.
I hope now it's clear that I'm worried sick about this, and we all should be.
That's not to say we should also have hope. This will be solved and fixed. But it will likely take years.
mt
Comment by Mark Taylor — April 4, 2008 @ 9:31 am
Speaking of fish kills has anyone heard if the diesel and kerosene spill into walkers creek in Giles county has caused any problems.
Comment by Terrance — April 4, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
Good question, Terrance.
That Big Walker spill has been a big pain for the landowners, that's for sure.
The continue to be concerned about the impact on their property. It sounds like it was pretty well contained to that area.
Thanks for reading.
mt
Comment by Mark Taylor — April 4, 2008 @ 2:50 pm