 |
|
 |
| ||
|
Anglers At Risk
Interviewers for a survey of seafood consumption published this March stood on public piers, beaches and boat ramps and, in five languages, asked 1,300 anglers how much Bay fish they ate. They showed them pictures of 16 different types of fish and shellfish, queried them about cooking methods, ethnicity, income, education and households, even pulled out a plastic model of an eight ounce fish fillet to help them estimate meal size. What they found was about one in ten anglers was eating more Bay fish than was good for them and more than a third had never heard or seen warnings regarding the consumption of Bay fish.
"It's kind of depressing to see no measurable increase in awareness since the last study was conducted by Save the Bay in 1995," says state Department of Health Service's Alyce Ujihara.
In 1994, state health officials issued an advisory recommending that individuals limit their Bay fish consumption due to high levels of mercury and PCBs in the fish. The survey, undertaken by Health Services and the S.F. Estuary Institute, sought to identify anglers who are at risk due to their consumption habits, as well as to characterize the fishing population and provide information for education (see Now In Print).
"It surprised me that so few were eating above the advisory, what with all the anecdotal evidence we had of a large poor welfare population subsisting on Bay fish," says the Institute's Rainer Hoenecke. "What also jumped out was that people with higher incomes and education were eating just as much Bay fish as people without." (See graph). Ujihara says that comparable numbers of people at both income extremes were eating above the advisory - perhaps the well-to-do have more leisure time to fish.
The survey suggests that cultural factors have more to do with risk than other factors. Asians (particularly Filipinos) and African Americans were most at risk, being more likely than other ethnic groups to eat above the limit and to eat white croaker, the most contaminated species. More Asian anglers also ate fish skins andcooking juices, or raw fish, practices which increase contaminant exposure.
The next challenge, says Ujihara, is to find better ways to educate these at-risk groups, probably more through their communities than signs on fishing piers. "If someone they trust from their own community gives them advice, it's more believable," she says. "Our message needs to not only be literally, but also culturally, translated in terms of what to do with Bay fish."
Ujihara is also worried about the "disconnect" between the men who fish and see the advisory signs and the women at home cooking, eating and serving the fish to their children (new national advisories for pregnant and nursing women and young children were released by the EPA and FDA early in 2001; current Bay advisories are even more restrictive). According to the survey, 45-50% of anglers had women of childbearing age in the household who ate fish.
More state money for more seafood consumption education is now being championed by Assemblywoman Dion Aroner. Ujihara says only half the known fishing sites around the Bay have warning signs. "People have a right to know and make choices. We need to work on how to make our message more specific and useful," she says.
Contact: Alyce Ujihara (510)622-4500. See also www.sfei.org and www.epa.gov/ost/fish. ARO
[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]
Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project