The Coffee Shop

    This page is designed to help you express your views and thoughts about the regulatory climate of the Aquatic Livestock Industry.  Therefore, please respect your fellow peers within our industry but feel free to have a lively discussion.

Note:  The writers and publishers of the website strive to present, as possible, accurate and factual information for the ALA website viewers. Should you find an error or misstatement, please advise the Webmaster and provide cross reference materials for correcting inaccurate statements or reference materials.  Thank You.

Example on how to submit view is simply state your remark, question or view and write your viewpoint for others to contemplate.

Please submit you comments to this link:  Coffee Mug

1:  What the?

The other day, another farmer called up about what was going to be next yearís requirements in our State concerning fish health testing. At the time, I didnít know, but would try to find out for him. A couple of days went by without a reply and the farmer mentioned finally called the person in the know about what his requirements would be, but forewarned him that due to weather changes and the opportunity for testing it already had happen several weeks ago when the weather was still somewhat warm. The State DNR rep. said that his testing would be accepted at the 120 fish sample for the farm but next year he would have to test at 120 per species lot requirements. He was indicating to the farmer that this was what the upcoming requirements were going to be for our industry this coming season.

One of the problems around the Great Lakes States is the lack of standardization of testing requirements and to learn there will be a couple different testing methodologies within your own State leads one to the title above!

BB

2:  Good morning, hope you donít mind me bringing my coffee over and joining you fellas?   Iíve heard a couple of other farmers asking if we had to do more testing next year. Without touching on the proverbial problem for farmers and veterinarians to find current and consistent information for testing and certifying aquatic livestock, why the increase in testing? Is the farm on a secure water source? Has the farm been tested before this year?  Does the farm have a biosecurity plan?  Does the farm ever bring new animals in?  Sounds like the farmers are not getting any benefit from a disease free history, routine and longstanding testing record, only certified livestock brought onto the farm and biosecurity efforts in the operations.  Wildlife would NOT expect to enjoy such benefits with open waters, public fishing, and so forth.  However, someone needs to ask the DNR why aquatic livestock need to be tested like wildlife when there are significant biosecurity steps being taken and in place?  The fact that VHSv, for example, has not gotten onto a farm with good biosecurity seems to contradict the regulatory move to increase livestock testing levels because wildlife surveillance testing needs to be increased. 

PC