Do you have any idea how much fish and seafood you eat? Could you list all of the kinds of fish or seafood you eat frequently? Occasionally? Where do you get your seafood? How do you usually prepare flounder? Bluefish? How often do you eat canned tuna? Well, if you live in Connecticut, researchers at the University of Connecticut are trying to find out the answers to these questions and many more.

Sea Grant Extension educator Nancy Balcom and her colleagues are trying to quantify the fish and seafood eating habits of Connecticut residents. The project was funded by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and the results will be used by DEP and state health officials to set water quality standards protective of human health, and to educate those at highest risk of eating fish species contaminated with PCBs or heavy metals.

The researchers are gathering data for the population as a whole, as well as certain subpopulations, such as sport anglers, cultural or subsistence fishers, women of childbearing age, and young children. While most seafood consumption studies generally look at one segment of the population, such as anglers, this study is comprehensive.

The main tool of the project is a mail survey, but interviewers are also involved. Two University of Connecticut students have been combing Connecticut beaches and marinas to talk with anglers, and a Vietnamese woman was hired to collect the necessary information from members of the Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong communities. Spanish-speaking households will also be interviewed.

"We hope to get a good representation of the people in Connecticut, in terms of race, gender, age, economic status, and fish-eating habits. It's as important to reach those who do not eat fish or seafood, as it is to find the ones that eat fish daily," notes Balcom.

So, could you answer these survey questions? "At first, it may seem hard to think of all of the fish and seafood you eat, and how often you eat them." says Balcom. "I was skeptical myself, until I sat down and filled out one of the forms. But I found I could do it fairly easily. I'm just glad I wasn't filling out a food frequency for ice cream or cookiesÉ." The project is slated to be completed in September 1997.

When UM nutritionist Linda Kling looked at the thousands of tiny, transparent "worms" swimming in her fish tank, she knew she had something unusual. What Kling saw were tiny cod, and by all rights, they should not have been there; she had expected most of them to die. Kling is working with scientists at UNH and URI on a Sea Grant-supported project to develop techniques for raising cod, the backbone of New England's traditional groundfish fishery.

The tiny cod in Kling's tank had hatched about eight weeks earlier from eggs brought to her laboratory from URI. After several weeks, about two-thirds had died, but more than a third of the cod larvae, an unprecedented number, were alive and growing.That was the first of three experiments in which the percentage of cod raised has exceeded results from any other published study to date.

Kling thinks there are several possible reasons for recent success with cod. They include the density of the fish in the tanks, the use of full-spectrum light bulbs, and an increase in water motion in the tanks. All three possibilities defy conventional wisdom passed down from Norwegian experiments and other scientists.

Researchers, aquaculturists, equipment manufacturers, environmentalists, regulators, and others gathered in Portland, Maine, for three days in May for a first-of-its-kind event - an international conference devoted to the special challenges and needs of "Open Ocean Aquaculture." Sponsored by Maine/New Hampshire Sea Grant, UNH Cooperative Extension, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and MIT Sea Grant, the conference attracted some 200 participants and presenters from across the United States, as well as from Norway, Sweden, Russia, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, Canada, and Australia.

"The conference focused on raising fish in unprotected waters," reports Rollie Barnaby, a marine educator with Maine/New Hampshire Sea Grant and one of the conference organizers. "It was an exciting event. The response and enthusiasm exceeded our expectations. We had presentations on the latest equipment, economics, policy making, raising capital, risk management, and environmental concerns."

Research conducted by the MIT Sea Grant Center for Fisheries Engineering Research (CFER) indicates that an alternative approach to landing bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore tuna may be more effective, resource-sparing, and marine mammal-friendly than the methods currently used. Data from the two-year study, which was authorized by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is now being examined by the agency as it considers making mid-water pair trawling an approved method for catching tuna.

In the study, a small group of fishermen spent two seasons mid-water pair trawling for tuna in the Northwest Atlantic. With this method, two vessels work together, with each boat pulling on one side of a net. Nearly 95 percent of the fishing trips were made with NMFS observers, and results show a smaller number of encounters with sea turtles and marine mammals.

"This experimental fishery represents a new way of getting things done," said Cliff Goudey, director of CFER and coordinator for the experiment. "By allowing the experiment and providing observers, NMFS was able to get the data it needed to make an informed decision, with minimal expense."

In many places of the world, coral reefs have been damaged by land-based development; while in other areas, management plans in coral reef ecosystems attempt to provide a balance between demand and sustainability. Researchers at SUNY at Buffalo hope to determine whether a management plan for a Caribbean coral, which contains an extract that may soon be in high demand from cosmetic companies, is needed.

Pseudopterogorgia elisabethae is a common gorgonian (coral) found in coral reefs throughout the Caribbean. One of its natural products, a pseudopterosin, contains anti-inflammatory properties. At present, the coral is the only source for the active compound. A well-known cosmetic company has been using the extract as a skin protectant, and it is expected that demand will increase as the cosmetic industry targets the extract because of a high demand for natural ingredients in skin-care products. Presently, there is no commercial synthesis of the compound, and collections of the coral are being made in the Bahamas under a temporary permit.

Howard R. Lasker, SUNY at Buffalo biological sciences professor, and Mary Alice Coffroth, SUNY at Buffalo biological sciences research assistant professor, are investigating efforts to determine the distribution and abundance of the coral, its reproductive cycle, survival rates, and whether it can be grown through mariculture.

The one-year project, "A Management Plan for the Bahamian Gorgonian Pseudopterogorgia elisabethae: A Preliminary Survey," is a collaborative effort involving the Sea Grant programs of New York, Puerto Rico, and California.

The Sea Grant project is the start of a future long-term research plan that will include a detailed population study and a mariculture feasibility project. In this preliminary project, Lasker and Coffroth will survey colonies and collect samples of larvae to determine reproductive biology of the species, conduct DNA fingerprint analysis of colonies, and survey potential study sites.

The research plan may provide a model for managing other reef organisms, and help identify traits to separate those that can be harvested and those that should be afforded complete protection, according to the scientists.

Study Examines Coastal Residents'
Willingness-to-Pay for Flood Insurance

A recently concluded project, supported by WHOI Sea Grant, looked at how coastal residents perceive flood risk and how that perception is influenced by what they know about flood risk. An economic analysis to evaluate perceived flood risk and willingness-to-pay (WTP) to insure against future damage was conducted by contingent valuation method through a household survey of Cape Cod, Mass., residents.

Investigators Yoshiaki Kaoru, formerly with the Marine Policy Center at WHOI, and Graham Giese, a coastal geologist and WHOI Sea Grant marine advisor, found that effective communication about flood risk among scientists, policy makers, and the public was an influential factor in respondents' WTP.

"Many important policy decisions are made in order to prevent potential future catastrophe, such as that caused by severe storms or hurricanes," said Kaoru. "Risk perceived by the public can significantly influence policy decisions."

Three versions of a questionnaire were mailed randomly to 2,500 residents. The versions differed only in the type or amount of flood risk information provided to respondents just before they read questions about their perceived flood risk and willingness to purchase flood insurance at hypothetical premium prices. Of the original 2,500 questionnaires mailed, 1,648 were returned - a 66 percent response rate.

Looking at all responses together, the average WTP for flood insurance premium was calculated as $575. This is not far off the actual premium, $484, paid by owners of flood insurance policies. The project also looked at how information about flood risk influenced respondents' decisions about how much they would be willing to pay for coastal flood insurance.

"Detailed description of flood risk on Cape Cod clearly increased the respondents' WTP,"said Kaoru. Version 3, which included a map of 100-year flood plains and a paragraph about the current and future flood risk on Cape Cod, resulted in the average WTP of $1,038. By contrast, versions 1 and 2, which had less information about the flood risk, yielded the average WTP of $572 and $370, respectively.