From: Bill & Sandra Ihrig
Sent: Sat Feb 26 14:02:40 2011
To: ToxicsRuleMaking
Cc: BOWLES Ed
Subject: Comments on Proposed DEQ Rulemaking
Importance: Normal
Attachments: RESOURCE MATERIAL FOR CONTAMINATION ISSUES.pdf; EPA Columbia River Basin Report (page 14only)January 2009.pdf; Columbia River Cancer Risk EPA Study.pdf; Cancer - Interpret Map - State Cancer Profiles.pdf; Comments on: Revised Water Quality Standards for Human Health Toxic Pollutants and Revised Water Quality Standards Implementation Policies Improved rules for toxic substances in our water ways is way past due. For second time in my life I have had elevated levels of heavy metals in my body causing me to symptomatic and extreme enough to make me very sick and develop multiple symptoms including peripheral neuropathy (that was not a result of any disease process). I had elevated lead, mercury, aluminum, cadmium and other heavy metals. What was most disturbing was the elevated levels of uranium. Does this mean that the radioactive material that has already reached the Columbia River in several places is now contaminating our Columbia River fish? Have there been any testing of this heavy metal (uranium) done on our Columbia River fish? If not. then I will be so bold as to ask why not. Are you not charged with protecting the public health? After much research and testing by the FDA on tainted prescription drug I took and DEQ water testing of a suspect city well leaves me with the probable cause of my heavy metal contamination coming from the Columbia River fish I bought and ate from the local Indians. The local Native American population are not the only people being affected by the contaminated fish in the Columbia River. Our Wasco County Cancer Rate Incidence is elevated. It is above the state and national Cancer Rate Incidence average. Maybe we need to save our Wasco County citizen’s health and leave the salmon alone; thus giving a new meaning to ‘catch and release’ when we catch fish from the Columbia River. Also it is very disturbing to me that the Oregon State Fish and Wildlife feed the trash fish (minnow pike/squaw fish) back to the hatchery fish after they have been turned in for their bounty money. If these trash fish are contaminated as shown in the EPA reports (see attachments) then why would we take these contaminated fish (that already have a high heavy metal burden) and feed them back to the hatchery fish. ‘garbage in – garbage out’ In my opinion, not a very bright Oregon State Fish and Wildlife policy. One would think that we would have learned a lesson from our ‘Mad Cow’ scare (years ago) and not feed contaminated animal by-products back to our livestock and in this case contaminated fish. Over the years I have observed that our state agencies don’t do enough proactive to protect our citizen’s health. If something isn’t federally mandated; nothing gets tested or even considered for testing. It would seem to me that because of Hanford being in our back yard that should put us on ‘special alert’ regarding public safety issues. However I do not see that happening. And if you claim that it is happening, then show me the evidence; as I am all ears. However, most certainly not enough was done in time to save my health. I would like to see other Wasco citizens warned of the dangers lurking in the Columbia River. Thank you for the courtesy of listening. Sandra Ihrig 709 East 21st Place The Dalles, OR 97058