Quote:
Originally Posted by 5th Tuition
Reds; thanks for taking the time to respond. When I checked your "hot link" all those studies were performed from 1998-2006. There has been a lot of work on Myco and Rockfish. I don't think any of the studies are good news for rock infected with Myco.
The whole premise for my letter is that if there is "a framework by which disease-associated mortality may be specifically addressed within fisheries models for resource management", then it needs to be included in the DNR report released to the ASMFC and the general public.
DNR appears to have put together a nice packet of information, my only question is why was information related to Myco and rockfish omitted. If Maryland is a principle nusery for rockfish, and 40-70 percent are infected by a chronic disease which has a negative impact on the population; then it needs to be addressed when contemplating increasing the take of large rockfish from the migrating stock off the coast.
5th (Marty)
|
The link I posted was not what I intended. Here is the right one.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/j.../118493967/toc
Journal of Fish Diseases is where you can find the latest info. As of 2009 the studies claim they don't know much about the disease. That's why any info was omitted from ASMFC data presented.
I don't see what this has to do with allocation. To me it's just grasping at straws. Whether a million pounds is eaten by the people that catch them or sold to someone to be eaten. It's the same fish.
We have diseases in most protein that we eat. That why aliens introduced us to fire. To kill disease.
