From owner-sci-res@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Thu Feb 3 18:17:33 2000 Return-Path: Received: by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix, from userid 110) id 9520717B1D; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:17:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix, from userid 6016) id 6511F17B17; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ftp-news.csita.unige.it (ftp-news.csita.unige.it [130.251.200.249]) by hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11365 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 09:11:01 GMT Received: (from news@localhost) by ftp-news.csita.unige.it (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA22976 for bionet-sci-resources@net.bio.net; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 10:11:01 +0100 To: bionet-sci-resources@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk From: "ANSBA - Associazione Nazionale Sviluppo Biotecnologie Avanzate" Newsgroups: bionet.sci-resources Subject: Tebio, 1 international exhibition on biotechnology Organization: University of Genoa, Italy Message-ID: <87bgn5$mdv$1@ftp-news.csita.unige.it> X-Trace: ftp-news.csita.unige.it 949569061 22975 130.251.107.208 (3 Feb 2000 09:11:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.unige.it NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Feb 2000 09:11:01 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Sender: owner-sci-res@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Genoa Congress and Exhibition, in cooperation with the Advanced Biotechnology Centre, organises Tebio, 1st International Exhibition and Congress on Biotechnology (Genoa, May 24-26 2000). Above all Tebio means information, a reponse to the main issues affecting the biotechnology field. The initiative ains to foster a wider debate at general public level by providing correct information and to provides companies operating in the sector toward establishing new business, through mechanisms faciliting technology transfer from the result field. For forther detailed information please find http://www.fiera.ge.it/Tebio2000 or contact: Scientific Secretariat: Advanced Biotechnology Center , L.go R. Benzi, 10 -16132 Genoa Italy Tiziana Ruzzon tel+39-010-5737281, Elisabetta Vitiello tel. +39-010-5737493 Organisation: Genoa Congress and Exhibition Centre, P.le Kennedy, 1 16129 Genoa ItalyGiulio Pontiggia tel.+39-010--5391375 Press Office: National Association for the Development of Advanced Biotechnologies, c/o Advanced Biotechnology Center, Tel/fax +39-010-5737300 Press Office Genoa Fair Rino Surace tel. +39-010-5931373 From owner-sci-res@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Tue Feb 29 07:47:50 2000 Return-Path: Received: by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix, from userid 110) id C199517B2C; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:47:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix, from userid 6016) id 0BC9817A43; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:47:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from beaver.cs.washington.edu (beaver.cs.washington.edu [128.95.1.1]) by hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA27647 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 22:48:20 GMT Received: from nntp4.u.washington.edu (root@nntp4.u.washington.edu [140.142.17.38]) by beaver.cs.washington.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/0.3) with ESMTP id OAA21732 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 14:48:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from root@nntp4.u.washington.edu) Received: (from root@localhost) by nntp4.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW99.09/8.9.3+UW00.01) id OAA29438 for bionet-sci-resources@beaver.cs.washington.edu; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 14:48:11 -0800 To: bionet-sci-resources@cs.washington.edu From: Steve Barbeaux Newsgroups: bionet.sci-resources Subject: Fisheries Council System in the U.S. Organization: NMFS Message-ID: <38BAFBDF.51DD7F24@noaa.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: nntp4.u.washington.edu 951778091 37370 (None) 140.142.17.38 X-Complaints-To: help@cac.washington.edu X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:47:47 +0000 (GMT) Sender: owner-sci-res@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I'm not sure if this is the place for academic questions, but I thought I'd try here once and see what happens. The question I'd like to pose it this: Is the U.S. Fisheries Council system flexible enough to adapt to the decadal changes observed in some ecosystems? Can the Councils adapt their policies to changes in species composition or carrying capacity of an ecosystem fast enough to avoid catastrophic results? Let's take, for example, the North Pacific: Suppose there was a change in the Bering Sea ecosystem where it no longer supported the numbers of pollock it currently does, but instead was dominated by herring, shrimp, and flatfish. Could the NPFMC adapt its management policies to such a change? Would the momentum of the pollock fishery and supporting industry push the council to make poor management decisions, therefore pushing the pollock fishery past a point where it could no longer easily recover in future decades. This supposition is purely academic, I'm merely using the North Pacific as an example to illustrate my point. I think there is evidence on the East Coast of the United States where the Council was not able to adapt to ecological changes and continued with policies that overexploited certain stocks. Is this due to the nature of the Council system or merely a reflection of that particular council's management choices? Does the council system need to be modified? If so, any suggestions? I have some thoughts on the subject, just wondering what other people in the field were thinking. Steve Barbeaux Masters of Marine Affairs Candidate School of Marine Affairs University of Washington