an opportunity to talk menhaden with junebug has availed itself. If you subscribe, please treat Ms Hall-Arbor's list with respect. And be prepared for a glut of email.
To subscribe:
Send an email to [email protected]
Leave subject line blank
In the body of the message type: SUBSCRIBE FISHFOLK YOURFIRSTNAME YOURLASTNAME
The listserv is automated and will pick up your email address directly from the message.)
from today's list,
Subject: Re: menhaden cap/here is greed-at it again?
From: "Niels Moore"
Date: Wed, March 8, 2006 3:20 pm
To: [email protected]
Priority: Normal
Options: View Full Header | View Printable Version
In a message dated 3/8/2006 3:07:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
Or, per the definition I've provided, one can simply look at the menhaden
catch records and observe that localized depletion is occurring, in the
Chesapeake Bay, whether measured over the last decade or the last
half-century.
Shaw-
By virtue of your statement above, you would apparently argue that
"localized depletion" is evident, because a *declining* trend in commercial landings
exists. Conversely, then, an *increasing* trend in commercial landings would
naturally indicate that localized depletion is not occurring. Interesting,
indeed.
From your original post, you stated, "a lot of biological indicators that
all point in the same direction, and make it clear that localized depletion
issues have been, and continue to be observable."
Care to shed light on any of the other indicators?
-Niels
To subscribe:
Send an email to [email protected]
Leave subject line blank
In the body of the message type: SUBSCRIBE FISHFOLK YOURFIRSTNAME YOURLASTNAME
The listserv is automated and will pick up your email address directly from the message.)
from today's list,
Subject: Re: menhaden cap/here is greed-at it again?
From: "Niels Moore"
Date: Wed, March 8, 2006 3:20 pm
To: [email protected]
Priority: Normal
Options: View Full Header | View Printable Version
In a message dated 3/8/2006 3:07:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
Or, per the definition I've provided, one can simply look at the menhaden
catch records and observe that localized depletion is occurring, in the
Chesapeake Bay, whether measured over the last decade or the last
half-century.
Shaw-
By virtue of your statement above, you would apparently argue that
"localized depletion" is evident, because a *declining* trend in commercial landings
exists. Conversely, then, an *increasing* trend in commercial landings would
naturally indicate that localized depletion is not occurring. Interesting,
indeed.
From your original post, you stated, "a lot of biological indicators that
all point in the same direction, and make it clear that localized depletion
issues have been, and continue to be observable."
Care to shed light on any of the other indicators?
-Niels