Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?

In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
really polluted.

"James" > wrote in message
...
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

I would and do. Our river is fairly clean these days.

James wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
all kinds of god knows what into the water.

I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.

James wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

Not from the Lower Rio Grande! Especially not since all the agri-land
run off from hurricane Dolly. UGH!

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Janet Wilder > wrote in news:48966af2$0$1830$c3e8da3
@news.astraweb.com:

> James wrote:
>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>
>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>> really polluted.
>
> Not from the Lower Rio Grande! Especially not since all the agri-land
> run off from hurricane Dolly. UGH!
>


Hmmmmmm, seems to be a worldwide thing.

I'd never eat a fish from the Brisbane River. I have eaten Mud Crab from
the river, but that was about 15+ years ago.

I think most of the fish in the river have 3 eyes, anyway :-)

--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?

> James wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?

Five years ago I was walking through the kitchen at work and the guy
that caught and cooked this catfish poked a forkful at me. I'm kind
of like Pavlov's puppy: wave food at my mouth and I just swallow and
ask what it was later. To this day I have never eaten another bite of
either fish from the Red River of the North OR catfish. And I have no
intention of deviating from that position.

Lynn in Fargo
Wouldn't swim in the damn thing either. Prefer the Missouri.

"Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
...
>
>> James wrote:
>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> Five years ago I was walking through the kitchen at work and the guy
> that caught and cooked this catfish poked a forkful at me. I'm kind
> of like Pavlov's puppy: wave food at my mouth and I just swallow and
> ask what it was later. To this day I have never eaten another bite of
> either fish from the Red River of the North OR catfish. And I have no
> intention of deviating from that position.

What did it taste like?

On Aug 3, 6:27*pm, James > wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
> ....
Haven't had the chance since I left Alaska. Pity. -aem

In article
>,
James > wrote:

> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?

Yep.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 18:27:55 -0700 (PDT), James > wrote:

>Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
>In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>really polluted.


I expecxt it's pollution. The Michigan DNR recomends that children under the age of 13
and women of child bearing age not eat fish caught in the inland lakes and rivers at
all.

The main pollutants seem to be lead, mercury, trichlorethane, acetone and PCB's. Good
stuff Maynerd.

wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 18:27:55 -0700 (PDT), James > wrote:
>
>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>
>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>> really polluted.
>
>
> I expecxt it's pollution. The Michigan DNR recomends that children under the age of 13
> and women of child bearing age not eat fish caught in the inland lakes and rivers at
> all.
>
> The main pollutants seem to be lead, mercury, trichlorethane, acetone and PCB's. Good
> stuff Maynerd.
>
>
PA says this:

Note: All sportfish taken from Pennsylvania waters by recreational
angling are subject to a one-meal-per-week consumption advisory. The
statewide advisory does not apply to fish from commercial sources,
including private fish farms, restaurants and markets.

And then:

CLEANING AND COOKING YOUR FISH
PCBs and most other organic contaminants usually build up in a fish’s
fat deposits and just underneath the skin. By removing the skin and fat
before cooking, you can reduce the levels of these chemicals. Mercury,
however, collects in the fish’s muscle and cannot be reduced by cleaning
and cooking methods. To reduce PCBs and other organics:
• Remove all skin.
• Slice off fat belly meat along the bottom of the fish.
• Cut away any fat above the fish’s backbone.
• Cut away the V-shaped wedge of fat along the lateral line on each side
of the fish.
• Bake or broil trimmed fish on a rack or grill so some of the remaining
fat drips away.
• Discard any drippings. Do not eat them or use them for cooking other
foods, or in preparing other sauces.

On Aug 3, 8:27*pm, James > wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. *It
> had a gasoline smell to it. *Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

Never. Especially now, when flood waters still abound in our rivers.
I might eat trout from a trout stream, but that's about it. Iowa has
some of the worst waterways (pollution-wise) in the country, mostly
because of the agribusiness and corporate factory farms.

N.

On Aug 3, 9:51*pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in ...
>
>
>
> >> James wrote:
> >> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> > Five years ago I was walking through the kitchen at work and the guy
> > that caught *and cooked this catfish poked a forkful at me. I'm kind
> > of like Pavlov's puppy: *wave food at my mouth and I just swallow and
> > ask what it was later. *To this day I have never eaten another bite of
> > either fish from the Red River of the North OR catfish. And I have no
> > intention of deviating from that position.
>
> What did it taste like?

It was very hot (temperature, not spice) but I remember it tasted
muddy - of course, that's what I always expected catfish to taste
like and the Red River has a clay bottom.
Lynn in Fargo

"James" > wrote in message
...
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

Being formerly from NJ I know most large rivers around there were polluted
and it wouldn't surprise me if there was a bad smell to an eel if it wasn't
cleaned up well. Being one who has eaten a lot of river/stream eels, I never
had one that smelled like gasoline. There has been a tremendous turnaround
on the Hudson, Delaware, and other large rivers around there since the 60's
due to some very influential environmental groups.

That said, fish from rivers is not toxic per se, you need to take into
account the specific DNR recommendations for that river, where the fish were
caught (downstream of a riverside factory is not a plus), the fishes
position in the food chain, whether you are pregnant, and all that stuff.
Flooded rivers in Iowa have sewage in them -- like the farmed fish imported
from Vietnam are raised in.

I now live in Minnesota where there are much less restrictive cautions about
eating fish -- but still you don't eat it everyday. Unless you do I wouldn't
worry if I were you.

"Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in message
...
On Aug 3, 9:51 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
> "Lynn from Fargo" > wrote in
> ...
>
>
>
> >> James wrote:
> >> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> > Five years ago I was walking through the kitchen at work and the guy
> > that caught and cooked this catfish poked a forkful at me. I'm kind
> > of like Pavlov's puppy: wave food at my mouth and I just swallow and
> > ask what it was later. To this day I have never eaten another bite of
> > either fish from the Red River of the North OR catfish. And I have no
> > intention of deviating from that position.
>
> What did it taste like?

>It was very hot (temperature, not spice) but I remember it tasted
>muddy - of course, that's what I always expected catfish to taste
>like and the Red River has a clay bottom.


It's so funny, catfish to me tastes very clean. "Earthy," but clean.

On Aug 3, 6:27 pm, James > wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>
> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> really polluted.

You bet - Oregon's McKenzie River just got a great report & it's full
of happy trout. http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms...viewStory.cls?
cid=124507&sid=1&fid=1

Nancy T

Kathleen wrote:
> James wrote:
>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>
>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>> really polluted.
>
> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
> all kinds of god knows what into the water.
>
> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
> was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
> whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>

The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.

The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.

The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
is all I can figure.

"none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
...
> Kathleen wrote:
>> James wrote:
>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>>
>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>> really polluted.
>>
>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed all
>> kinds of god knows what into the water.
>>
>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water was
>> probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the whiskey
>> and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>>
>
> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
>
> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
>
> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
> is all I can figure.

how about the Naches river?

"Mike" > wrote in message
...
>
> "none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
> ...
>> Kathleen wrote:
>>> James wrote:
>>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>>>
>>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>>> really polluted.
>>>
>>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
>>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
>>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
>>> all kinds of god knows what into the water.
>>>
>>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
>>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
>>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
>>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
>>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
>>> was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
>>> whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>>>
>>
>> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
>> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
>>
>> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
>> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
>> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
>>
>> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
>> is all I can figure.
>
> how about the Naches river?
>

Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.

"ntantiques" > wrote in message
...
> On Aug 3, 6:27 pm, James > wrote:
>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>
>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>> really polluted.
>
> You bet - Oregon's McKenzie River just got a great report & it's full
> of happy trout.
> http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms...viewStory.cls?
> cid=124507&sid=1&fid=1
>

Mmm trout. You're lucky.

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:31:23 -0400, cybercat wrote:

> "Mike" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Kathleen wrote:
>>>> James wrote:
>>>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>>>>
>>>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>>>> really polluted.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
>>>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
>>>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
>>>> all kinds of god knows what into the water.
>>>>
>>>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
>>>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
>>>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
>>>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
>>>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
>>>> was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
>>>> whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
>>> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
>>>
>>> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
>>> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
>>> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
>>>
>>> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
>>> is all I can figure.
>>
>> how about the Naches river?
>>
>
> Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
> there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.

which is why a prudent person drinks whisky.

your pal,
blake

On Aug 3, 9:27*pm, James > wrote:
> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?

Yes but we normally get fish from our lakes. Ah, fresh pickeral !
Even a salmon would be okay.

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

In article >,
says...
> The message >
> from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>
>
> > Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
> > there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
>
> Well, just take my word.....there are plenty of crystal clear rivers
> and lakes in the world, beyond reach of any industrial or farming
> pollution, or run-off from human habitation.
>
> Janet (Scotland).
>

Yes but some toxins are carried via rains etc. Those are mostly the
lighter elements, heavy metals need to be ground up very finely in order
to get up to clouds and then rained down upon those pristene lakes and
streams.

Granted it's not anywhere near the heavy metal pollution of an
industrial city/state. But it's present.

In article >,
says...
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:31:23 -0400, cybercat wrote:
>
> > "Mike" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> "none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> Kathleen wrote:
> >>>> James wrote:
> >>>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
> >>>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
> >>>>> really polluted.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
> >>>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
> >>>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
> >>>> all kinds of god knows what into the water.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
> >>>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
> >>>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
> >>>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
> >>>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
> >>>> was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
> >>>> whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
> >>> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
> >>>
> >>> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
> >>> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
> >>> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
> >>>
> >>> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
> >>> is all I can figure.
> >>
> >> how about the Naches river?
> >>
> >
> > Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
> > there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
>
> which is why a prudent person drinks whisky.
>
> your pal,
> blake
>

Or wine. Beer and ale uses water in the process so they wouldn't
necessarily be safe. Then there's mead. I have a recipe for it around
here somewhere.

In article >,
says...
> The message >
> from T > contains these words:
>
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > > The message >
> > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
> > > > there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
> > >
> > > Well, just take my word.....there are plenty of crystal clear rivers
> > > and lakes in the world, beyond reach of any industrial or farming
> > > pollution, or run-off from human habitation.
> > >
> > > Janet (Scotland).
> > >
>
> > Yes but some toxins are carried via rains etc. Those are mostly the
> > lighter elements, heavy metals need to be ground up very finely in order
> > to get up to clouds and then rained down upon those pristene lakes and
> > streams.
>
> > Granted it's not anywhere near the heavy metal pollution of an
> > industrial city/state. But it's present.
>
> Our rain has been laundered over 3000 miles of ocean, other than
> being salty I reckon it's pretty clean by the time it gets here :-)
>
> Janet
>

However, it doesn't help the mercury and other heavy metal content of
the oceans.

Mike wrote:
> "none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
> ...
>> Kathleen wrote:
>>> James wrote:
>>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>>>
>>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>>> really polluted.
>>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
>>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
>>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed all
>>> kinds of god knows what into the water.
>>>
>>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
>>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
>>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
>>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
>>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water was
>>> probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the whiskey
>>> and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>>>
>> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
>> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
>>
>> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
>> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
>> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
>>
>> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
>> is all I can figure.
>
> how about the Naches river?
>
>
I haven't fished it much, but the Naches looks clean, it runs through
some reasonably uninhabited mountain country, and it joins up with the
Yakima. I'd guess it's probably good. From where it joins the Tieton
River to Rattlesnake Creek, it's catch-and release only for trout.
Otherwise, it's a 2-fish limit with a minimum size of 12 inches.
That'd make the start of a decent lunch, I think.
As with the Yakima, access to the Naches can be difficult in places.
There's some rough country for the casual hiker there.
I think of it as combining a healthy diet and exercise...
Unless I'm completely alone. In that case I might use somewhat stronger
language when my last hand-tied Elk-hair Caddis becomes a tree ornament!

In any case, the topic here is the fish's safety as food. There are
warnings for certain kinds of fish caught in the lower Columbia River,
but even there they don't ban it. They would, I think, if eating the
fish was making people ill.
My opinion only - and I am NOT an expert or an authority.
You get sick? Not my fault. <-- Legal stuff.

blake murphy wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:31:23 -0400, cybercat wrote:
>
>> "Mike" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "none" <""Mark\"@(none)"> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Kathleen wrote:
>>>>> James wrote:
>>>>>> Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>>>>> had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>>>>> really polluted.
>>>>> I don't believe I'd eat fish from the Missouri or Mississippi. Not real
>>>>> sure about the Meramec, either. I guess it would depend where along it
>>>>> the fish were caught, and if there'd been recent flooding that washed
>>>>> all kinds of god knows what into the water.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd have to pass on fish caught from at least one nearby creek. The
>>>>> stable hands at the local barn were puking sick after one of their camp
>>>>> outs and bonfires, and they swore it was from the fish they caught and
>>>>> ate. And it might even have been true. They'd been swimming in that
>>>>> creek with their horses and dogs and by the end of the day that water
>>>>> was probably more like "mud & mammal tea" But my money was on the
>>>>> whiskey and pepsi, with dirty hands running a close second.
>>>>>
>>>> The upper Yakima river in Washington State? Yes, if the law wasn't
>>>> watching. It's catch-and-release... A good fly-fishing trout river.
>>>>
>>>> The lower Yakima river, where it's legal to keep what you've caught? Oh,
>>>> heck no... That's after the river's been through hundreds of miles of
>>>> muddy farmland. Catfish and bass country.
>>>>
>>>> The state is trying to protect the fish and kill the less wise citizens,
>>>> is all I can figure.
>>> how about the Naches river?
>>>
>> Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
>> there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
>
> which is why a prudent person drinks whisky.
>
> your pal,
> blake

We all just need to remember:
There is no perfectly safe food. Anywhere.
That's why people have the ability to throw up.

B^D

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 17:38:43 -0400, T wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
>> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:31:23 -0400, cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
>>> there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
>>
>> which is why a prudent person drinks whisky.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>>
>
> Or wine. Beer and ale uses water in the process so they wouldn't
> necessarily be safe. Then there's mead. I have a recipe for it around
> here somewhere.

'tis true. the founding fathers thought nothing of downing a pint of ale
with breakfast. maybe our current public officials should take note.

your pal,
blake

none wrote:

>
> We all just need to remember:
> There is no perfectly safe food. Anywhere.
> That's why people have the ability to throw up.

True.

Horses can't puke (or belch) and sometimes it's the death of them.

> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 18:27:55 -0700 (PDT), James >
> wrote:
>
>>Would you eat fish you caught from your local rivers?
>>
>>In the 60's I had a bit of an eel from the Hudson River in NYC. It
>>had a gasoline smell to it. Don't know if that's natural or if it was
>>really polluted.
>
>
> I expecxt it's pollution. The Michigan DNR recomends that children under
> the age of 13
> and women of child bearing age not eat fish caught in the inland lakes and
> rivers at
> all.
>
> The main pollutants seem to be lead, mercury, trichlorethane, acetone and
> PCB's. Good
> stuff Maynerd.
>
>

The Gowanus Canal in NYC is so polluted that local scientists believe that
they can use samplings from the water to invent new medications.

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 17:38:43 -0400, T wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> says...
>>> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:31:23 -0400, cybercat wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where there's no safe water, there's no safe fish. I don't really think
>>>> there's a good reason to believe that the water anywhere is safe.
>>>
>>> which is why a prudent person drinks whisky.
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>>
>>
>> Or wine. Beer and ale uses water in the process so they wouldn't
>> necessarily be safe. Then there's mead. I have a recipe for it around
>> here somewhere.
>
> 'tis true. the founding fathers thought nothing of downing a pint of ale
> with breakfast. maybe our current public officials should take note.
>

Nah, they wouldn't make any better decisions after a couple of belts.