Resources by Jonathan van Senten
Title | Available As | Summary | Date | ID | Author |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Overview of Good Aquaculture Practices | Aquaculture continues to be the fastest growing sector of food production world-wide. The Virginia aquaculture industry produces a variety of different foodfish, baitfish, shellfish, and ornamental species. Likewise, a variety of different production methods are implemented across the state, including pond production and indoor, intensive recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS). Continued expansion of aquaculture in the state, as well as across the region and country, demands attention to both environmental and economic sustainability. |
Jul 2, 2024 | 600-054 (CNRE-40P) | ||
The Problems of Avian Predators on Fish Farms: Scaup on Baitfish (Golden Shiner) Farms | Baitfish farmers raise several different species of fish, often called minnows, to sell as live bait for anglers across the United States. The most popular and commonly raised baitfish species is the golden shiner. Many baitfish farms are located within a major flyway used by migrating birds. A variety of different migratory birds arrive at baitfish farms each fall, feed on fish on the farms, and then depart on spring migration. Baitfish farmers have reported major losses of fish from these avian predators. |
Jul 26, 2024 | AAEC-191NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: National Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 11, 2024 | AAEC-192NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Coastal State Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-193NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Midwest States Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-194NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Colorado Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-195NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Idaho Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-196NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Michigan Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-197NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: New York Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-198NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: North Carolina Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-199NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Ohio Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-200NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Pennsylvania Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-201NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Utah Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-202NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Virginia Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-203NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: West Virginia Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-204NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Wisconsin Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-205NP | ||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Salmonid Industry: Western Region Findings | The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden. |
Sep 12, 2024 | AAEC-206NP | ||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses: Quarter 1 Results | Apr 29, 2020 | AAEC-218NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses: Quarter 2 Results | In response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) disease pandemic, a collaborative initiative was launched by The Ohio State University, Virginia Tech, and Engle-Stone Aquatic$, LLC to assess the impacts of the pandemic on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied industry. Over the course of the first quarter of 2020, the U.S. government developed and implemented several emergency relief measures, in an effort to assist small businesses and individuals. The Q2 survey asked specifically about these relief and assistance programs, as well as questions on adaptations and changes being implemented by farms and businesses in response to the ongoing challenges. This fact sheet summarizes the Q2 results of this study, covering the period from April 10th to June 29th, 2020. |
Aug 6, 2020 | AAEC-228NP | ||
Cormorant Predation of Commercial Catfish Aquaculture in the Mississippi Delta | Mar 9, 2020 | AAEC-231NP | |||
Aquaculture Marketing Issues and Solutions in Response to COVID-19 Concerns | Sep 11, 2020 | AAEC-232NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture allied business: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 5, 2022 | AAEC-235NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. catfish businesses: Quarter 1 Results March 23, 2020 to April 10, 2020 | In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how catfish farms have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020. |
Jan 4, 2021 | AAEC-236NP | ||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. ornamental fish farms: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-237NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses located in the USDA North Central Aquaculture Region | Dec 5, 2022 | AAEC-238NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. mollusk businesses: Quarter 1 Results March 23, 2020 to April 10, 2020 | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-239NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses located in the USDA Tropical and Subtropical Aquaculture Region: Quarter 1 Results March 23, 2020 to April 10, 2020 | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-240NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. crustacean farms: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-241NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses in the USDA Western Aquaculture Region: Q1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-243NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. trout foodfish businesses: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-244NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. tilapia farms: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-245NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied businesses: Quarter 1 Results March 23, 2020 to April 10, 2020 | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-246NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. sportfish farms: Quarter 1 Results | Dec 6, 2022 | AAEC-247NP | |||
Overview of a Survey on the Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Virginia Farms and Agribusinesses, Fall 2020 | Jan 5, 2021 | AAEC-275NP | |||
Enterprise Budgets for Trout Production in Idaho | Feb 8, 2021 | AAEC-276NP | |||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Shellfish Industry: Pacific Coast Findings | Jun 16, 2021 | AAEC-285NP | |||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Shellfish Industry: California Findings | Jun 16, 2021 | AAEC-286NP | |||
The Effects of Regulations on the U.S. Shellfish Industry: Washington Findings | Jun 16, 2021 | AAEC-288NP | |||
Impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. Mollusk aquaculture and allied businesses: Quarter 4 Results | Apr 22, 2022 | AAEC-295NP | |||
Economic Contributions of the Virginia Seafood Industry | Nov 4, 2022 | AAEC-301NP | |||
Economic Contributions of the Virginia Seafood Industry - Infographic | Nov 23, 2022 | AAEC-302NP | |||
Economic contributions of the Virginia seafood industry - Fact Sheet | Nov 7, 2022 | AAEC-303NP | |||
Warmwater Marine Finfish in the Southern Tier States: Assessment of Historic Supply and its Implications for Aquaculture Commercialization | Nov 8, 2022 | AAEC-305NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Eastern Shore, MD results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-307NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Montgomery County, MD results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-308NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Prince George County, MD results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-309NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Washington D.C. results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-310NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Nassau County, NY results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-311NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of New York City results | Feb 20, 2023 | AAEC-312NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Suffolk County, NY results | Feb 21, 2023 | AAEC-313NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Hampton Roads, VA results | Feb 21, 2023 | AAEC-314NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Northern Virginia (NOVA) results | Feb 21, 2023 | AAEC-315NP | |||
Changes in consumer preferences for seafood products due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Summary of Richmond, VA results | Feb 21, 2023 | AAEC-316NP | |||
Assessing the Effectiveness of NCRAC-funded Research in Aquaculture Within the North Central Region | May 17, 2023 | AAEC-318NP | |||
Effectiveness of North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) Funded Research in Aquaculture Within the North Central Region (NCR) | Aug 4, 2023 | AAEC-320NP | |||
Assessing the impacts of the 2020 Virginia Sea Grant COVID-19 Response and Supplemental Activities | In response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, a project was initiated through a partnership between the Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center (VSAREC), the Virginia Institute of Marine Science Marine Advisory Program (VIMS MAP), the Virginia Coastal Policy Center (VCPC), and Old Dominion University (ODU) to address a variety of topics related to seafood marketing and new marketing channels. From this project several resources pertaining to direct-to-consumer marketing, online sales, COVID-19 at the workplace, and general requirements within the industry were created and made available to Virginia seafood producers and allied businesses. |
Sep 20, 2023 | AAEC-322NP | ||
Cost of Regulations on Baitfish/Sportfish Farms: What will it be for trout? | Dec 5, 2022 | AREC-202 | |||
Alabama Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 10, 2017 | AREC-211 | |||
Arkansas Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 12, 2017 | AREC-212 | |||
Florida, Illinois, Texas, and Kansas Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 12, 2017 | AREC-213 | |||
New York Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 12, 2017 | AREC-214 | |||
North Carolina Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 18, 2017 | AREC-215 | |||
Ohio Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 18, 2017 | AREC-216 | |||
Pennsylvania Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 18, 2017 | AREC-217 | |||
Wisconsin Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 18, 2017 | AREC-218 | |||
Great Lakes Region Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 24, 2017 | AREC-220 | |||
South Central Region Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Costs | Apr 24, 2017 | AREC-221 | |||
South East Region Baitfish and Sportfish Regulatory Cost | Apr 24, 2017 | AREC-222 |