Will depend on which repellant! The Deet based ones eat any man made material, not only plastics, indeed Deet is an agricultural pesticide, weedkiller and solvent. Not an ideal candidate for spraying on your skin., but hey it works for mozzies!Anglers use a repellant don't they? Disasterous to plastics etc. (which in the long term good for the environment)
Viewpoint or documentation back-up for proof?
Researched and documented.Viewpoint or documentation back-up for proof?
You blame dogs and their owners.
Until you did a bit of reasearch on the subject you were blaming dogs peeing on lamposts for the issue. You then found out that most dog owners use spot on hair and skin treatments, you then changed your focus to dogs hitting the water, aka your last photo's.
Dont need to quote you, its there for every one to see, in your opening ripostes to these threads, dogs p issi ng on lamposts was the cause, according to you!I have never blamed dogs for anything - only their owners can be blamed.
That is garbage, from start to finish. If you want to argue what I have said, then quote me, but don't make stuff up. I have no interest in which particular products pet owners use. I could not care less. I am only going by the findings of the scientists, and debating, like everyone else, on the possible sources of the insecticides they are finding in the waterways.
I am saying we should all be making an effort when it comes to the adverse effects of insecticides on aquatic invertebrates, whether that comes from agricultural use, domestic garden plant use, personal anti-midge/tick whatever use, or pet use.
It seems that Dog People reckon they don't need to make any effort on this?
Aint there just!Nope! Not my dog, must be somebody's else. Whatever the cause, from whatever source, it needs to be ceased. Apparently, studies have been undertaken & as there are suspicions, as anglers, we should abide by taking any drastic measures required to prevent polluting our water courses. There are many on here that spout when industries & farmers that do the same.
Dont need to quote you, its there for every one to see, in your opening ripostes to these threads, dogs p issi ng on lamposts was the cause, according to you!
I think the tablets might get excreted as even more toxic metabolites, and pissed against lampposts and then washed by rain into the storm drains and on into rivers? Not sure. Read the published papers on the subject and that other thread I already mentioned.
Of course we all should be making an effort, but dont get affronted when someone points out you, as a fisherman in midge infested areas, are probably doing the same with your midge repellants as dog owners protecting their dogs.
... It is up to us to avoid these things and avoid putting them into watercourses, whether they be plant sprays or pet treatments or midge sprays or whatever...
... It's a question of asking everyone who uses insecticides to have a look at what they are doing and to ensure there is no possibility of any insecticides ending up in watercourses in an active form as a result of us using them, whether it is as flea treatments or plant sprays or midge repellents, or anything else, surely?...
... The point is that insecticides kill insects and they are very good at it, some of them in ridiculously small concentrations. If we want insects, we need to be careful with our use of insecticides. Know exactly what you are using, how much of it you ae using, what you are using it on and what happens to it after you have used it.
I've also tried to say that we are all responsible for trying to do what we can to prevent any insecticides entering the environment in ways that cause harm to 'friendly fauna', regardless of their provenance. Not just dog owners and Dog People.
Well ok.Well, if you were to quote me, it might stop you making things up I did not say.
I only mentioned lamp-posts once in this thread and that was not in the opening riposte, it was in post #38. This was it...
It wasn't 'according to me' and I didn't say it was 'the cause', I said it was a possibility with metabolites of tablets. Some folk use flea tablets, do they not??? I said I wasn't sure, and it was mentioned in at least one of the papers I read. So, AFAIK, it's still a possible addition to the various topical applications and all the other sources.
Who's affronted here? I think someone is, but it's not me. I have posted in this thread the following...
I should add that some of my best friends are Dog People, and my brother is one as well. But I still say they are barking!
I did not really want to do this but--
Now I could go on and hightlight you telling all and sundry that fiprinol was not used in agriculture.
But I wont.
You are either very forgetful, or are just brazening it out.
I really dont care which.
Just a thought: in 2016, the latest year I could get data for, according to DEFRA: 97 tons of neonicotinoids were used by farmers in the UK, 96.7 tons of which was clothiandin. Less than 1 kg per year of Fipronil has been used since 2013. 186kg of imidacloprid was used in 2016 but that had fallen from 5,700kg the previous year. So these particular neonicotinoids present in the rivers now must be coming from other sources, as by now most if not all of these would have been washed away.
I'm afraid some of us just bury our heads in the sand. A couple of years ago I was a member of a club that had a lake surrounded by farmland. There were quite a lot of buzzers but one time I was fishing, the farmer in the neighbouring field was spraying with insecticide upwind of the lake, and I got a strong smell of the insecticide on the other side of the lake. After that - no sign of any buzzers. I raised this with the lake owner, who rented out the fields, and committee but got a total denial of any issue. No buzzers seen for the rest of the year and no more fish caught on buzzers. So I left the club!Ask Bert. He has all the answers!