Posted
by GANGGREEN on 2002 PM:
Very important reading material.
Especially for those of
you that fish over bedding bass or who refuse to accept that there is some
rational justification for closed bass seasons in
Pick up a copy of the In-Fisherman 2002 Bass Guide. It has an insightful
article by Gord Pyzer, a
tournament bass fisherman and fisheries biologist.
The article talks about a few studies including those done on
The article points out several other problems relating to spring bass fishing
but I'll let you guys ferret those things out yourselves.
Please pick up the magazine and read this article, it is well worth the cost.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble fellas but there is
just more and more empirical evidence that fishing over bedding bass in
northern waters is very hurtful to the fish population. Those of us who continue
to do this are no better than those individuals who knowingly poach bass,
walleye, deer, turkey, etc. (well, maybe slightly better).
Posted
by Paul Mattie on 2002 PM:
"appears
to be detrimental to overall fry production and survival because of an increase
in brood predation and male nest abandonment."
Is fry production the limiting factor in both size and quality of our bass
populations?
"Those of us who continue to do this are no better than those individuals
who knowingly poach bass, walleye, deer, turkey, etc. (well, maybe slightly
better)."
Hey Bill it's legal in every state to fish for bedding bass so I guess all
those state legislatures and state fisheries biologists that determine what the
rules are only slightly better than poachers too.
Posted
by GANGGREEN on 2002 PM:
A
couple of answers.
Understand that these are
my opinions. I do a fair amount of reading on the subject and I know many
fisheries biologists and fisheries grads so I'd like to think that it is a
somewhat educated opinion.
As to your first question, I'd think that fry production and survival are very
important limiting factors in the quality of our fishery. As I stated
previously, there are other factors as well which are touched on in the
article. You'll have to read it to see some of the others(maybe
you already have). It is a well written article with some good points. I don't
want to steal the thunder of the author or the magazine's publisher.
To the second point, I'd be lying if I didn't admit that what I said was a bit
tongue-in-cheek, however I do believe that knowingly
fishing over bedding bass is akin to poaching when there is growing evidence
that it is a detrimental activity.
The fact that bass fishing over bedding bass may be legal doesn't necessarily
make it ethical. There are many considerations that each state and/or province
must take into consideration when establishing laws and regulations. These
include, but are not limited to, ethical, scientific and social issues. In some
cases I believe that early seasons are allowed because all the factors are
considered and those who make the decisions believe that the pros outweigh the
cons. In other circumstances I believe that they are dead wrong (Any decent
legislator or biologist would admit that they sometimes make mistakes, just
like you and me). I'd suspect that in many cases the fisheries biologist would
just as soon see the season remain closed, the legislators couldn't care less
and only vote to open the season because they had some vocal proponents of
spring bass seasons.
For some states to close the season during ALL bedding activity would mean that
the open season for bass would be short indeed, if any was possible. Obviously
there are differences between states. There are also differences between
individual waterways. There may be SOME waterways that actually can sustain
this sort of thing over the long term but personally I doubt there are many in
My post was not intended to ruffle anyone's feathers Paul, just to point out
some interesting biological findings. I for one would be glad to make some
small sacrifices now for long term gains or the knowledge that my children will
have fine fishing in the future. I suspect that you feel the same way.
Posted
by ttony_5 on 2002 PM:
ENOUGH OF THIS CRAP, PLEASE!!!!
God, this is like trying
to solve the abortion issue. There are always going to be two sides so let's
all just respect it for what it is and stop trying to decide who is right and
wrong.
There, I feel better now.
__________________
Tony Fiorino
Proud Chairman of Team Skeeter - Somers Chapter (a
fictional organization, please stop sending in applications)
Posted
by GANGGREEN on 2002 PM:
With
all due respect....
This is exactly the kind
of crap that should be on a bass angling forum.
I sympathize with John who is constantly put in a position where he has to
referee. I also always hesitate to post things of this nature because I have
been around long enough to have witnessed the arguments on this and other
boards.
However, this is not JUST my personal opinion but scientific evidence about
what happens when we yank a bass off of a bed. We ALL care about the bass
population and its continued health. This is exactly the type of topic that
should be debated.
If you or anyone else were to post a thread documenting scientific evidence
that bed fishing didn't harm the bass fishing potential on a body of water, I'd
be glad to read it and discuss it. Burying your head in the sand and ignoring
scientific evidence isn't likely to change the nature of that evidence.
I made the mistake of suggesting that bed fishing was "poaching" and
later acknowledged that my statements were a bit tongue-in-cheek but I have
never called another angler a nasty name and I don't recall ever having been
called any dirty names.
My opinion is that we're all adults here and should engage in educated
discussion. If the thread deteriorates then I will not only defend John's
decision to delete it but I will ASK him to.
Posted
by judge66 on 2002 PM:
I read the article, it
was good and did make some good points but like many studies this one was most
likely conducted by a grad student (yes their proffessor
puts his name on it, but most likely it was some grad student doing the
research)who had 1 to 2 years to conduct the study and a limited buget. I will not argue that removing a male bass off a
nest will not lead to some increase predation, the smaller fry that is new to
me but I could see it since most fry feed off the slime on parent fish for the
first few weeks and if the parent is off the nest they are not feeding then.
The problem with this study is it does not follow the age class to adulthood.
The only way you can say fishing a bedding bass is negative to the bass
population is to chart the population. This was not done so the statment that fish a beding bass
will harm the bass population as a whole is not supported.
While this article states that removing a bass from the nest leads to smaller
fry and increased fry predation it does not mention that only a few percent of
all the fry produced will live to adulthood, and when we talk about populations
the only bass that really count are those that breed(adults),
as fisherman we care about the catchable fish and the
trophy fish all adults. This study does not say that removing bass from their
bed leads to fewer adult bass!!!!! Who cares if there are less fry or even one
year old bass if there are about same amout of adult bass. The other thing this article does not deal with is
population issues. With many fisherman practicing catch and release, population
issues play a bigger role in total population, called carrying capacity a lake
can only support some many fish (limited by space, food, oxygen, ect.) so if most adults live to ripe old age (because when
caught they get put back) when a lake reaches this limit most younger bass are
eaten by the adults and the survial rate can be close
to zero like .0001% a few hundred adults for every million fry. In this case
even if no fry lived the total population would not change. In some reservoirs
where there is very limited to no fishing, year class can be missing due to the
limiting size of the population.
example
1,000,000 fry produced only 1% live to adult hood so if no bed fishing you
would have 10,000 @ 1% ( in most norther lakes it is
more like 1/2%) in that year class.
Even under very heavy fishing pressure only about 1/2 the nests are fish and
according to this article 50% increased deaths of fry so only
1,000,000 fry half the nest fished 500,000 and half die, leaves 750,000 so
7,500 adult bass so 2,500 less adult bass
This example does not take in account that the loss at the nest could increase
the odds of the remain fish to live so this loss at the nest could be made up
by the increase odds of other nests to make it to adulthood.
In a lake at population limit this could be a 100 or less bass missing
Posted
by GANGGREEN on 2002 PM:
Some good points
Judge.
I'm not sure that I
understand your statements about 1/2 the nest though. I don't think that I read
that in this article. There is no doubt that only a small percentage of the fry
hatched in any given year survive. This is well documented. The point of this
article (the article actually talked about several studies, not just one) from
what I read is in fact the impact that bed fishing can have on the behavior of
adult bass and the changes in breeding ecology of a lake (ie.
younger bass being forced to breed before they're biologically ready) which can
result in total year class losses. Obviously a total year class loss can have a
real impact on the quality of fishing. Bass can withstand a bad year class
better than many species of fish can but these studies clearly documented some
bad things that can happen.
I'm also not sure that I buy your argument that the study is faulty because it
doesn't follow the fry from egg to adult. That quite simply wasn't the
objective of THIS (or these) particular studies. By trying to do too much a
study can be drawn into question. Can you imagine the manpower and money involved
in trying to conduct a study like you're suggesting. Don't get me wrong, I'd
love to see it but if we can draw some conclusions from 20 smaller studies then
so be it. The survival of a single year class based on
date of birth, food availability, etc. are the subject of other studies which
have been done and hopefully will continue to be done.
The point of the studies discussed was to document what effect bed fishing had
on the survival of the fry in the nest, the survival of those fry overwinter (a HUGE factor in the quality of our fisheries)
and how it affected the breeding ecology of the adult bass. I think that those
are fairly broad objectives. Had these studies taken on much more than that I
would have questioned their validity.
I value your perspective on the studies however. I believe that we have to
civilly discuss the merits of this. Don't ask, don't tell might salvage
someone's ego but it doesn't do the bass any good.
Posted
by bobn on 2002 PM:
judge --you said it
better than i could have--not all fry are expected to
live--what about creel limits allowing parents to be taken before they get to
spawn--what about native americans hundreds of years
ago taking everything and anything they could to survive--i'll
bet they took those easy to catch spawning fish--just to feed their families--
we have no problem catching and keeping trout and salmon that invade the rivers
to spawn--what about natural predation--eagles, cormorants, racoons
etc just to mention a few--in this age of c & r i
don't think the angler will play a major role--bass have been around a million
years and modern man a few hundred thousand--i don't
think the angler w/ c& r mentality will make much of a difference--just mho
uneducated opinion--i think there are other issues
that need addressing more so than this one ie:
pollution, poaching and certain groups not obeying the law--a law enforcement
officer enforces the laws on the books, not what he/she thinks in their own
mind is morally right or wrong----bobn
Posted
by judge66 on 2002 PM:
Green
My point was I do not debate that pulling a bass off a nest will effect the fry on that nest, it will have a negative impact,
many studies have shown that.
My problem with that study is it says that fry are negatively effected so you are
negatively impacting the population, this study did not prove that and for them
to even say that without showing the effect on the adult population makes the
findings very hard to believe.
My point is that the negative effect on the fry does not equal a negative
effect on adult populations. Yes it would be a very difficult study and a very
expensive study.
On a thread on this subject about a month ago I posted about how I was luckly enough to be involed ina study where water levels were lowered and half the nest
were lost (dry with eggs in the nest/fry dead in the nest) with no ill effects
to the adult population (in fact it increased)
I just think that you have to look at the whole picture and while it was a good
article and a good study, their findings that bed fishing will have a negative
effect on the adult "fishable population" is not supported. The other
thing is many time for mag publishing you end up
taking a 200 page study and cutting it down to a few thousand word (2 pages) so
that it is easy to read and does not take up more then 4-5 pages with pics and drawings, I would love to see the real study and
their finds, I will promise you the real finds do not state this proves that
bed fishing or removing bass from the beds will have a negative effect on
population. It will say that fry are negatively effected
and that this may or may not effect the total population of bass in this lake
and that more studies are needed to show a relationship between fry death and
adult populations.
I am not saying bed fishing is right or wronge I am
just saying that this study does not prove what it says it does and that there
are no studies that I know of that do show a ghood
link between bed fishing and the effect on the bass population. My thoughts are
this only such a small number of fry even see one year never mind adulthood
that the lose of some fry do to bed fishing is very small to no effect.
The issue of keeping bedding females is a big no no, in fact keeping any
bedding bass is a big no no. Keep bass should be see
as bad.
I am glad to see a good educated thread here and I hope to get more input
Posted
by GANGGREEN on 2002 PM:
I definitely agree
with you about....
them taking a large study and trying
to make it easily readable. The good thing is that the author of the article is
a retired senior manager with the
Now I remember about your lowered pond and the 50% survival of the beds, I just
didn't pick it up at first.
I'm not convinced that the studies discussed made the jump that you're
suggesting (that because fry were killed in individual nests that the adult,
fishable population suffers). What I took from the article was that:
1) in northern waters every nest MAY be needed in a bad year. As you and I have
both suggested, there are lots of factors that limit fry survival but in some
years in northern waters every last fry does in fact count. This probably isn't
true in southern waters with their longer spawning seasons and faster growth.
Remember, their bass may be spawning at 3 or 4 years of age while it may take a
northern bass 5-9 years to accomplish the same thing.
2) Large bass tend to do much of the spawning in nature. Large bass also tend
to spawn earlier in the spring which GREATLY impacts the overwinter
survival of fry. Only about 1/3 of adult bass are "programmed" to
spawn in any given year (that one surprised me). What this means is that if you
pull a smallmouth off the nest (the study also dealt with largemouth) that no
new bass will rush in to fill his place. It also means that if larger bass are
not available to spawn that smaller bass are forced into spawning before
they're biologically ready. This has two serious impacts which likely would
affect the "fishable adult population" either in the near future or a
few years down the road. First of all, the smaller bass spawn later thus the
fry are smaller going into winter and have a much lower survival rates (this
might lead to a failure of an entire year class. In northern waters it only
takes a few bad year classes before you have almost no breeding age bass
available down the road in a few years.). Secondly, the spawn is much harder on
younger fish than on sexually mature 5-9 year olds and many of these younger
fish succumb over winter to the stress brought on by spawning.
One last point. In general I agree with your
hypothesis, that some beds suffer fry mortality but it doesn't impact the
population. I'm sure that in the south that is almost always true and even in
the north it is usually true. I'm quite certain however that if you were to ask
any fisheries biologist in any of the new england
states that they would tell you that entire failures of a year class in certain
waters isn't that uncommon.
It's nice beating it back and forth with you. I hope that some of the other
guys will get a copy of the magazine to see what we're talking about.
Posted
by Frank J on 2002 PM:
Re: ENOUGH OF THIS CRAP, PLEASE!!!!
quote:
Originally
posted by ttony_5
God, this is like trying to solve the abortion issue. There are always going
to be two sides so let's all just respect it for what it is and stop trying to
decide who is right and wrong.
There, I feel better now.
Venting about laws here is good because we can discuss it and get other views.
What we need to do is write to our state officials.
Lets keep an open mind.
__________________
Frank Jovine
---------------------------------
> email
- webmaster@nybass.com
> url
- www.nybass.com
---------------------------------
Quote: "A
bad day of fishing is better than a good day of work"
---------------------------------
Posted
by JOHN G on 2002 PM:
I understand Tony's
frustration and in many ways I share it, but as Bill said, as long as it is
discussed in a very intelligent and scientific manner the way it is being done
on the thread here, then it is certainly relevant and worth hashing around....
JOHN G
Posted
by wnybassman on 2002 PM:
Bill, I plan on picking
up a copy when I get a chance, to read this article.
The way I see it, is we as bass fishermen need to do everything we can to
protect this species. Afterall, without bass, we
would all be chatting about golf! With more and more interest in this sport, we
don't seem to be gaining any new lakes to spread this pressure out. So these
fish will continue to get more and more pressured over time.
I am no fisheries biologist by any means, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn
Express last night, but if something is this debatable, chances are there is
some damage being done in some instances.
I think both sides of the issue of this post are "behaving" quite
well, and I enjoy reading them (although I tend to side with Bill
)
__________________
Bassman's
Thread of the Web - A Look at WNY's Bass
Fishing
-
Protection and organization of your rods
"Perhaps God gave the answers, to those with nothing to say" -
Savatage
Posted
by Kurt on 2002 PM:
I did stay in a Holiday
Inn Express last night (not really), so I thought I would participate in this
discussion. First, I compliment the previous posters for their restraint and
courtesy in discussing this always volatile topic. Some good points have been
made on both sides of the issue.
I do have a question for Judge though. Can you explain about the fry feeding
off of the slime of the adult for a few weeks? To be honest, I have never heard
this and wonder where this information comes from. Is there an article or some
other source of information you can point me to?
As for the article Ganggreen identifies in his first
post, I admit I have not yet read it. But I have read other recent articles
published in scientific journals about this topic and feel I have a good
understanding of much of the biology involved. Just on what I have read in
these posts, I think I can agree that the article Ganggreen
refers to does not prove that bed fishing is detrimental to a population.
However, it does point out that there are impacts to fry, which can have a
negative impact on a population depending on what other factors limit its size.
Just as it is inappropriate for someone to claim that decreased fry production
is detrimental to a population, it is equally inappropriate to take the results
of the study that found that destruction of half the nest in a lake due to a drawdown showed no ill effects to the adult population and
suggest it as proves fry production is not that important. The reason no ill
effects were observed may very well have been due to the overall positive
effect a drawdown can have on bass populations by
improving habitat, concentrating prey fish, reducing overabundance of fish that
may prey on bass eggs, etc. I imagine you would not get the same response from
the population if you just went in and destroyed 1/2 of the bass nests each
year.
I think one of the main points to be taken away from this thread is that we
just don't know how some populations will respond to catch-and-release during
spawning. Some appear to do well, some don't, and most we don't know. I think Ganggreen also made a good point that many fail to realize
or believe. Our fishing regulations (including those of other states) are not
necessarily based on what is best for the species involved. More and more,
political and social factors dictate what regulations we have to follow. So go
ahead and hound your legislators for regulation changes as you see fit. I would
just say read articles like the one Ganggreen cites
so you are as aware of the issue as you can be. And be careful what you wish
for...
One last thing. Graduate students often do some
incredibly useful and informative research. I don't think any science should be
blown off just because the person doing it is a graduate student.
Kurt
Posted
by Kurt on 2002 PM:
I just wanted to point
out that I did not purposely put those cute little icons in my last post. I
don't know how they got there, so I hope nobody reads anything in to them.
Kurt
Posted
by bobn on 2002 PM:
i don't know about bass, but the fry of the tropical fish
"discus" do feed off the body slime of their parents during their
first few days--bobn
Posted
by JOHN G on 2002 AM:
Kurt, I have been having
the same problem recently with the icons showing up by themselves, something we
are typing is a code for them , but I don't see why
normal english words should do that.....I will ask
Frank about that.....JOHN G
Posted
by Bassin Dude on 2002 AM:
I have so much to say on
this subject but I currently don't have time to say it. I've read at least
parts of 50 - 100 studies on bass. Many of these studies had to do with bass
reproduction and the effects of anglers on the species. As I recall, all but
one of the studies suggested that it was not wise to pull a guarding bass of it's bed even for a few seconds. The last study that comes
to mind was done by the
The study that suggested that there wasn't a problem was done in
The study that Bill refers to was done by Dr. Mark Ridgeway. For those of you
that don't know, Dr. Ridgeway has studied bass most of his adult life and has
really been the first to outline and document the behavior of smallmouth bass
on
I could really write a book on this but I gotta go to
work now. Any specific questions on stuff I've read, feel free to ask.
__________________
Tony
"As my own fishing seasons wind down to a
precious few, it's nice to know I'll be there, be there as long as I can. As
long as I can bait a hook and make a cast, as long as I am living, I intend to
be fishing."
-Ron Schara
Posted
by judge66 on 2002 AM:
The fry feeding off slime
from the parent (mostly male is the case of bass) is a very common in nearly
all egg laying freshwater fish. The length of time varies greatly from a few
hours the first real meals after the egg sack falls off to a few weeks, I am not sure how long this slime feed lasts in bass.
The issue of the draw down study, the reservoir was lowered in early may-late june, two years in a row. I my opion this is much worse than catch and release bedding
bass, 3 year later the 3 year age class and the four year age class(1st year of
draw down) where at the same numbers as the 3 and 4 year age classes counted
before the study. Yes I agree that lowering the water level may have increased survial of the fish.
But that is the first rule in science the simply act of studying something you
change it, there will always be flaws to any study, it
just depends on how big those flaws are. And that in the study you notes those
flaws and how they could of effected the study. This
study seemed to be very good and did shows some good data, to me at least the Mag, seemed to over simply the results and did not state
that this study is only suggesting the possible link between fry death and bass
population.
Posted
by judge66 on 2002 AM:
Everyone says they want
to help the bass population are are quick to jump on
not fishing beds, while there is only limited data stating that this is really
a bad thing which it very well might be.
But how many of you have made changes in your fishing equipment, tatics, ect that have been well
prove to be very bad for bass and other wildlife.
How many of you still use Lead? weights, jig heads, old lures
There is no question on the negative effects of lead on fish, birds, invertabrates(bass food)
How many of you have whiched over to a 4 cycle motor,
Lots of proof that 2 cycle are very dirty(some new very expensive 2 cycles are
close to 4 cycles), Oil and other hydrocarbon discharge from the motor to the
water very bad to all life
Lots of people on the board preach C&R(this is great) but how many of you
use barbless hooks, or cut your treble hooks down to
2 or even a single hook. This one is not as cut and dry as the others but a
smaller cut, less chance of problems
How many of you really wash off your boats, livewells,
balasts to make sure you do not pass problems from
one water to the next(zebra mussles, certian algea, disease, ect) this one is pretty clear but so few people really wash
their boats off from one place to the next and before the put in, you see all
that road grime on your car/truck well that gets on boats to, road tar is oil
wash it off before you but in.
My point is not that these are the end of the world (I personal have made the
change on these issues) but that these are clear issues that have negative
effects and yet very few fisherman have done anything about these, but will
stop fishing beds on so little real useable data that show any real proof that
bed fishing leads to small population
I will admit that after reading this thread I will rethink how I do my spring
fishing and I may not target visible bedding bass and fish for those off a bed
(pre and post spawners)
This is a good thread like the input
Posted
by judge66 on 2002 AM:
Bassin Dude
Very few lakes with the exception on lakes with major shipping industry (greatlakes, mississippi river and
conecting stream,river
and lakes) Have gobies they are non-native species and are very destructive to
all fish. There is video of a school of gobies wiping out smallmouth nests by haveing 3-4 gobies have a bass chase them off a nest while
the rest of the school raids the nest. That is why the
Another reason why this study or another dozen like it do not prove that
fishing beds will negatively effect the bass. Lakes
differ in so many was (type of predators) (size, depth, temp, clearity-these all effect then the bass spawn) And the amout of fishing pressure few hundred fisherman not a
problem for most lakes a few thousand problem so some but not for all, the
heavy heavy fished lakes where no matter where you go
you still see 5 or 6 boat that is a problem
While I do respect the study at question, the fact is most studies conducted by
college or universities are conducted by Grad student if not undergrad and over
seen by a Dr. or Professor the study was must likely written by the Proff. but much of the data would be collected by grad
students and this is why many studies get cut off, due to time limits of the
student graduating if your luckly the student are
going for doctorits and study 4 or 5 year but they
only do reashear for 2 maybe 3 years (1 year to plan
and get funding 2-3 to do the study and 1 year to write it up) I do not
question the results and I am sure they are creditable, the coment
was to show limited time and funding not crediablity.
Posted
by MikeM on 2002 PM:
Judge,
Excellent post on population dynamics.....
Posted
by GMAN on 2002 PM:
At what Depth do Bass
stop bedding?
All,
I really enjoyed reading this thread and I hope it continues. I am wondering if
there might me somewhat of a compromise to fishing during the spawn period.
Would it be safe to say that in fishing water over 8 feet deep, you would not
encounter Bass beds?. Maybe this would limit the
amount of potential beds one might happen to cross?. I
am no expert on this subject but it would seem to me pulling the
"guard" of a nest would certainly increase the chance of a predator
moving in and harming that nest. I would like to fish as soon as possible this
coming year but I'd also like to know I'm not harming the very same fish I will
be targeting in years to come. Again, this is a great thread in my opinion.
Have a good one,
Gary
Posted
by wnybassman on 2002 PM:
Judge, you forgot to mention in your list of "bad things" about livewell management during tournaments. More and more
studies come out revealing terrible (50%+) mortality
rates among tournament released bass. I have come to terms with the fact that
more fish than I realize, die as a result. No matter how well we manage our livewells, I'm sure we all can do better.
__________________
Bassman's
Thread of the Web - A Look at WNY's Bass
Fishing
-
Protection and organization of your rods
"Perhaps God gave the answers, to those with nothing to say" -
Savatage
Posted
by JOHN G on 2002 PM:
the thread remains intelligent,
thought provoking.....good job all.... JOHN G
Posted
by Kurt on 2002 PM:
Judge:
Getting back to the fry feeding off of the slime, I can believe that it is true
for some species, but I feel pretty comfortable in stating it is not the norm
for most egg-laying freshwater fishes. Most species are not nest guarders per
se, and many (like walleye, yellow perch, pike, musky, white sucker, carp, mamny minnows) simply broadcast their eggs over suitable
substrate and never see them hatch.
I would still be interested in a reference for bass fry doing this. I don't
mean to hassle you about this, but this is something I have not heard about
bass and would like to know for sure that it is true. I have access to pretty
much any scientific literature out there, so don't worry if the reference is
rather obscure.
I also think this has been a great thread. And Judge, I applaud you for the
steps you have taken to make your fishing more environmentally friendly. I have
taken some of the steps you mentioned, but not all. I did get rid of my
outboard motor and do almost all of my fishing now from a completely
non-polluting (not even noise) canoe. It limits where I can go, but I can cover
some good water in a day and still catch my share of fish.
Kurt
Posted
by mikeD in NYC on 2002 AM:
frys feeding off of slime!...hey guys, turn it down a notch! this thread is getting out of hand!destructio
just kidding... thanks for the informative discussion...very interesting