Re: Cs-137 in deer

[Bob Hearn <rah@america.net>]

I am in agreement with your dietary recommendations, but the broad leaf
fiolage appears to exhibit a higher retention rate for such deposition,
which can be partially understood just from geometrical considerations,
although I believe there are also other considerations such as possibly a
higher respirationrate as a specialized part of a more complex plant.

Bob Hearn
rah@ameriac.net

At 09:12 AM 11/8/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Group:
>
>I might also add that I've seen at least one Los Alamos study on elk around
>LANL in comparison with elk in outlying areas of NM. In fact, some
>activities were lower in the local herd (though statistically insignificant).
>
>In my experience in analyzing samples (vegetation, dairy products, etc.)
>from radiological environmental monitoring programs from various sites
>around the country, I've noticed the same levels of Cs-137 are not found in
>beef. Can anyone comment on why "browsers" might have a higher uptake of Cs
>than "grazers"?
>
>If my observations are correct, I would add a personal political comment:
>As a hunter, and frequent consumer of game meat, I suggest the benefits of
>a lean, higher Cs-137 diet far outweigh the risk of a high-fat,
>high-cholesterol one.
>
>
>Donald E. Dry
>Nuclear & Radiochemistry, CST-11
>Los Alamos National Laboratory         (505)667-4200
>MS J514                                (505)665-4955 FAX
>Los Alamos, NM 87545                   dry@lanl.gov
>
>