TWENTY-FIFTH ANNUAL EASTERN FISH HEALTH WORKSHOP MARCH 10-13, 2000   The Problems Of Data, Policy And Law In Fish Health Management   Thomas A. Wiggins Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department.103 South Main Street – Building 10 South, Waterbury, VT  05671, U.S.A.     For years fish health programs have been collecting data on the status of pathogens in most, but not all, state and federal fish culture stations.  In more recent times many commercial fish culture stations began to test their fish lots for pathogens because of the pressure of new regional fish health programs and state laws.  The ultimate objectives of fish health programs are to prevent or reduce the distribution of pathogens in the wild.  The objective is based on two assumptions that pathogens in natural populations are harmful, and pathogens are not uniformly distributed in natural fish populations.  To meet fish health objectives of limiting the distribution of pathogens, regional and state policy and state and federal law are made.  The conservative approach would be to not allow the movement of fish, but this is not practical due to commercial and public interests.  Not moving fish would put commercial aquaculturists out of business, stop restoration programs, and reduce recreational fisheries.  The basis of these laws come from the science of fish health; the ability to detect pathogens, knowledge about the pathogen and distribution of the pathogens (mainly from state and federal hatchery data.  However, this is a conservative approach that may be necessary because once contaminated we have not figured out a way of getting pathogens back out of a natural population.  But are there problems with the assumptions on the distributions and impacts of pathogens in the wild?  And is the science really conclusive? It has only been recently that data has been collected on natural or wild stocks.  Has this thrown a monkey wrench into the process?  And why are we testing, because when we started putting regulations on the commercial industry in the name of “protecting our wild fish stocks,” they started resisting.  They resisted by going to the legislature and requesting not to be regulated by fish and wildlife agencies.  They questioned whether or not the pathogens were already in the wild (the chicken or the egg thing) and we did not know.  The questioned whether our tests were reliable in detecting the pathogen.  They questioned if the wild stocks were already contaminated with pathogens, and they questioned if the pathogens actually impacted fish stocks.  To develop workable fish health policy and law requires good science and data, and it must balance the information known with the needs of the public.  It is unlikely that all the information needed to make a decision will ever be available.   Return to 25th Annual Eastern Fish Health Workshop Return to Leetown Science Center Home Page