VHS

The following fish CAN NOT BE EXPORTED from Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin. So please keep this in mind when shipping fish to other nanfa members.

Atlantic cod Gadus morhua
Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus
Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus
Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus
Brown trout Salmo trutta
Burbot Lota lota
Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus
Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch
Chum salmon Oncorhynchus keta
Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides
Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens
Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum
Grayling Thymallus thymallus
Haddock Gadus aeglefinus
Herring Clupea spp
Japanese flounder Paralichthys olivaceus
Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides
Muskellunge Esox masquinongy
Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus
Pike Esox lucius
Pink salmon Onchorhynchus gorbuscha
Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus
Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss
Redhorse sucker Moxostoma spp
Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris
Rockling Onos mustelus
Round goby Neogobius melanostomus
Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu
Sprat Sprattus spp
Turbot Scophthalmus maximus
Walleye Sander vitreus
White bass Morone chrysops
White perch Morone Americana
Whitefish Coregonus spp
Yellow perch Perca flavescens

Any fish not listed above is considered to be unsusceptible to VHS, and is legal to transport out of the listed states. It strikes me as strange that, for instance, Black crappie are susceptible, and White crappie are not.

For additional information: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/aqua/

This is serious shibby here people, this is not just another way the Govenment wants to step in and control your lives. This is a serious disease that really needs us paying some good and serious attention too. Preventing the spread of this is likely futile in the long run, but if we can slow it down long enough to study it, in relative containment, there will be a much better chance countermeasures can be developed for it.

If your in the states listed Please get involved with changing the Ballast water regulations for your state. All of us also need to work for this on a federal level and get involved with this issue. Reduction in Ballast water transmission of Exotic species and exotic diseases is turning out to be the single most important thing we need to be doing to preserve the Great lakes / Mississippi basin to at least something like a natural ecosystem. Many of the North West coast drainages are also being seriously affected by this.

I urge all to get involved in fixing this continuing and very detrimental issue to our native aquatic fauna.

Hey Richard, any suggestions on how to get involved?

Hey Richard, any suggestions on how to get involved?

There are many ways to do so.
Get involved with organizations that are seeking change in these areas. Try looking up your local watershed organization for a start. Stay on top of the Laws and regulations being proposed by your Dept. of Environmental quality or Dept. of Natural resources. These laws are always open for public comment before being enacted. You however need to keep up on them and follow them. Same goes for federal laws in this area of concern. They are put out for comment and you can indeed comment on them. Federally it is also not a bad Idea to contact your local officials and tell them what you think...Sometimes it works.

As a hobbyist get involved with the Habitattitude project which is a coalition of government, pet industry ,and concerned people that are looking for ways to reduce the spread of exotic or invasive species.
http://www.habitattitude.net/

Matt in your case as an Agriculturist you may also want to join the American fisheries society and sign up with the aquatic introductions section.

This is serious shibby here people, this is not just another way the Government wants to step in and control your lives. This is a serious disease that really needs us paying some good and serious attention too. Preventing the spread of this is likely futile in the long run, but if we can slow it down long enough to study it, in relative containment, there will be a much better chance countermeasures can be developed for it.

In general you are right, Richard, this is very serious, and we need to do what we can to stop its spread. However, I'll disagree with the following:

...this is not just another way the Government wants to step in and control your lives.

If that were so, then the order would merely be prohibiting the transportation of susceptible fish out of the affected watershed, that being the Great Lakes watershed. Consider the following:

1. The order prohibits movement of listed susceptible fish from one affected state to another. I cannot catch a listed susceptible fish in the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania and take it into the Lake Erie drainage in Ohio? And what good does this do? Prohibiting the movement of listed susceptible fish into an affected area helps nothing, regardless of where it originates.

2. The order prohibits the movement of listed susceptible fish from unaffected areas. I cannot move a listed susceptible fish caught in the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of Pennsylvania, even though the Delaware River drainage is unaffected? And the good this does is? Even more illogically, I CANNOT catch a listed susceptible fish on the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of state, but I CAN catch such a fish on the New Jersey side of the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of state. I can take a New Jersey fish across the river to Pennsylvania, but I can't take a Pennsylvania fish across the river to New Jersey, even though they were caught in the same drainage, and even though the drainage is unaffected. Where is the logic behind this?

3. The order does not prohibit intrastate movement of listed susceptible fish. So I CAN take such a fish from the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania, and move it to the Delaware River drainage in Pennsylvania. So the spread of this disease is not prevented at all by this order. If I did this, then New Jersey really would have a problem. And if I moved a fish from the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania and took it home to the Monongahela River drainage, every state in the entire Mississippi drainage could come to have this problem. Yet such movement is NOT prohibited by the order.

So yes, this IS your government controlling your lives, in a totally illogical way. We, on the other hand, need to be logical and responsible. I would not feel guilty moving a fish anywhere in the affected drainage, regardless of state lines. Since I don't live in the affected drainage, that's not going to happen, but I would not feel guilty doing it. We must not move fish out of the affected drainage, even intrastate, and release them (or any fish that has been in contact with them).

If we follow the NANFA Code of Ethics, and NEVER release a fish back into the wild (except for immediate catch and release), then this whole issue is a moot point. Then the only VHS we will have to worry about will be in our VCRs. I say we make this our goal.

I have read that there has been some success controlling this disease in Europe, by the way. So don't give up. Just don't release your fish, and let the responsible authorities worry about eradicating the disease.

Ed the order is a temporary measure until this thing can be figured out. Yes it is somewhat Illogical but it is there for a very good reason. whether you see the reason for it or not depends on how your looking at it.

The emergency order is not the final draft it is an emergency order to Quarantine the areas possibly infected.

Movement of these fish is actually not the biggest and most likely vector for the transport of this disease, Ballast water and shipping through the great lakes is......It is how it got here in the first place.

If we follow the NANFA Code of Ethics, and NEVER release a fish back into the wild (except for immediate catch and release), then this whole issue is a moot point. Then the only VHS we will have to worry about will be in our VCRs. I say we make this our goal.

This is all well and good but not everyone in the affected area is a NANFA member and really the order was not put out there for people like us.

Ed,
I agree with you, the folks that participate in this forum are educated in regards to the ramifications of releasing fish into the wild and want to do the right thing. The unfortunate part is we are the minority. Put yourself in a fish managers roll, it boils down to the managers having to evaluate the problem and determine the risk assessment of the disease spreading. There are many biologist that are recomending that laws be put on the books that would limit any live fish from being transported, period.

Emergency rules have come about on two fronts, first APHIS at the Federal level and their regulation pertains to interstate transport and across Federal borders. Intrastate movement would have to be addressed at the State level (ie- PA Fish & Boat). So what you are seeing as illogical is the seperate of authority between the Feds and state. We have to keep in mind that in some situations what appears to be illogical is in reality managers trying to protect our natural resources yet maintain as much flexibility as possible, this often times leads to examples that you point out. Also keep in mind from a fisheries manager perspective the best way to ensure the disease is not spread is to enact a law that limits all intrastate movements of live fish, so I would caution being too critical of flexible rules.

Your example of moving live fish across drainages brings up a valid point and I am sure there are PA fisheries managers struggling with this right now. Trying to figure out what to do? I suggest contacting them and let them know that people with your interest exist. Keep up to speed on proposed changes to regulations and how this would affect native fish enthusiasts. I can't stress enough to let them know you exist. I have found they are sympathetic to our cause and will be willing to try to find a solution.

I will tell you how this is playing out in NY state. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) put a VHS emergency rule into affect back in November 2006. It completely stopped all commercail bait harvest from Lake Erie, Niagara River, Lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence River from the fear those fish would be transported inland. Statewide, general anglers are allowed to harvest their own bait (up to 100 minnows) and they can only be used to fish with on the water they were captured (no transportation). The NYSDEC held informational meetings to this regard and the meetings got rather heated. The bait industry was heavily represented, there arguement was that they completely lost their livlihoods. I commend the NYSDEC for making the tough decisions and taking actions to protect our resources. It is definitely not an easy task.

For individuals in NY state that are interested in keeping native fish, collecting has always been done in a gray area. There never has been anything on the books in regard to collecting for aquarium purposes, so collecting was done under the guise of general bait collection. So we are faced directly with the problems associated with VHS. So technically, any individual collecting bait in NY can only fish with the bait in the waters they were captured in. No transportation period, anywhere, statewide. In addition, the current species allowable for "bait" collection is a rather long list including species of interest to many of us (ie- darters, cyprinids, killifish, etc). The 2008 proposed regulations will limit the species allowed to be collected for bait to just 5 species, basically your common baitfish species (golden shiners, emerald shiners, fathead minnows, etc). So either way native fish enthusiasts are faced with a problem in NYS.

I have been working with some NYSDEC fisheries biologist/managers in attempt to get our cause recognized. That being a recognized small group of consumptive users of natural resources with regulations that would address our activity specifically. Potentially this could be accomplished through a special license or some similiar avenue. If we can't get something in place, native fish collecting as we know it will be a thing of the past in NYS. The NYSDEC has proposed a permanent law that is identical to the emergency rule. The public comment period is closed (I posted this to Local Edition/East). Based on public input, the new rule may look differently. Time will tell.

This topic (VHS) should be of sincere interest to everyone on this list.

-Scott

In general you are right, Richard, this is very serious, and we need to do what we can to stop its spread. However, I'll disagree with the following:
If that were so, then the order would merely be prohibiting the transportation of susceptible fish out of the affected watershed, that being the Great Lakes watershed. Consider the following:

1. The order prohibits movement of listed susceptible fish from one affected state to another. I cannot catch a listed susceptible fish in the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania and take it into the Lake Erie drainage in Ohio? And what good does this do? Prohibiting the movement of listed susceptible fish into an affected area helps nothing, regardless of where it originates.

2. The order prohibits the movement of listed susceptible fish from unaffected areas. I cannot move a listed susceptible fish caught in the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of Pennsylvania, even though the Delaware River drainage is unaffected? And the good this does is? Even more illogically, I CANNOT catch a listed susceptible fish on the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of state, but I CAN catch such a fish on the New Jersey side of the Delaware River drainage and ship it out of state. I can take a New Jersey fish across the river to Pennsylvania, but I can't take a Pennsylvania fish across the river to New Jersey, even though they were caught in the same drainage, and even though the drainage is unaffected. Where is the logic behind this?

3. The order does not prohibit intrastate movement of listed susceptible fish. So I CAN take such a fish from the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania, and move it to the Delaware River drainage in Pennsylvania. So the spread of this disease is not prevented at all by this order. If I did this, then New Jersey really would have a problem. And if I moved a fish from the Lake Erie drainage in Pennsylvania and took it home to the Monongahela River drainage, every state in the entire Mississippi drainage could come to have this problem. Yet such movement is NOT prohibited by the order.

So yes, this IS your government controlling your lives, in a totally illogical way. We, on the other hand, need to be logical and responsible. I would not feel guilty moving a fish anywhere in the affected drainage, regardless of state lines. Since I don't live in the affected drainage, that's not going to happen, but I would not feel guilty doing it. We must not move fish out of the affected drainage, even intrastate, and release them (or any fish that has been in contact with them).

If we follow the NANFA Code of Ethics, and NEVER release a fish back into the wild (except for immediate catch and release), then this whole issue is a moot point. Then the only VHS we will have to worry about will be in our VCRs. I say we make this our goal.

I have read that there has been some success controlling this disease in Europe, by the way. So don't give up. Just don't release your fish, and let the responsible authorities worry about eradicating the disease.

Richard,
I can't not agree with you more. Imagine if 25 years ago, laws were in place to require ships to treat their ballast water? It maddens me to think about this.

To complete the ballast water connection to VHS if some folks are not following that. The leading thoery for the introduction of VHS to the Great Lakes IS through ballast water. The old practice was to bring freshwater ballast across the ocean and dump it in the great lakes when they picked up their intended cargo. Which brought a who's who of exotic species. To address that problem they started a water exchange practice, in which ships would exchange their freshwater in the ocean for sea water then carry that into the great lakes and discharge it. The thought was that nothing would survive (salt - fresh). Here is where VHS takes the stage, the leading theory is that is was picked up in sea water where it is known to occur. From DNA analysis, it appears it evolved into a freshwater form in less than 2 years. Our great lakes strain of VHS is different from the known salt water varieties.

So what's next? If these ballast water practices continue who knows.....
-Scott

This is serious shibby here people, this is not just another way the Govenment wants to step in and control your lives. This is a serious disease that really needs us paying some good and serious attention too. Preventing the spread of this is likely futile in the long run, but if we can slow it down long enough to study it, in relative containment, there will be a much better chance countermeasures can be developed for it.

If your in the states listed Please get involved with changing the Ballast water regulations for your state. All of us also need to work for this on a federal level and get involved with this issue. Reduction in Ballast water transmission of Exotic species and exotic diseases is turning out to be the single most important thing we need to be doing to preserve the Great lakes / Mississippi basin to at least something like a natural ecosystem. Many of the North West coast drainages are also being seriously affected by this.

I urge all to get involved in fixing this continuing and very detrimental issue to our native aquatic fauna.

Ed and other PA folks,

Laws were put into effect today to ban the movement of live fish from the Lake Erie watershed in PA. Again, they state the ban is temporary. I would think they will have to seek public comment on a permanent rule. I would keep my eyes peeled for that to be coming.
-Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
News release today-
AP NewsBreak: Pa. bans transport of fish from Lake Erie By DAN NEPHIN Associated Press Writer

January 30, 2007, 10:43 AM EST

PITTSBURGH -- The state Fish and Boat Commission on Tuesday imposed a temporary ban on taking live fish out of the Lake Erie watershed.

The ban is designed protect the health of the region's fishery by reducing the potential spread of fish diseases, said commission spokesman Dan Tredinnick.

Of particular concern is viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or VHS, a virus that has been detected in the Great Lakes system in the last several years. The virus has been linked to several fish kills and some fish believed to carry the virus are used as bait fish.

The virus poses no risk to humans but causes internal bleeding in fish.


The federal government last year restricted the movement of 37 species susceptible to the VHS virus.

Ed and other PA folks,

Laws were put into effect today to ban the movement of live fish from the Lake Erie watershed in PA. Again, they state the ban is temporary. I would think they will have to seek public comment on a permanent rule. I would keep my eyes peeled for that to be coming.
-Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
News release today-
AP NewsBreak: Pa. bans transport of fish from Lake Erie By DAN NEPHIN Associated Press Writer

January 30, 2007, 10:43 AM EST

PITTSBURGH -- The state Fish and Boat Commission on Tuesday imposed a temporary ban on taking live fish out of the Lake Erie watershed.

The ban is designed protect the health of the region's fishery by reducing the potential spread of fish diseases, said commission spokesman Dan Tredinnick.

Of particular concern is viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or VHS, a virus that has been detected in the Great Lakes system in the last several years. The virus has been linked to several fish kills and some fish believed to carry the virus are used as bait fish.

The virus poses no risk to humans but causes internal bleeding in fish.
The federal government last year restricted the movement of 37 species susceptible to the VHS virus.

Okay, that makes an awful lot more sense than the federal order! No movement out of the affected watershed. Movement of fish that don't originate in the affected watershed is not covered by the order. Somebody in Harrisburg is making sense, even when somebody in Washington is not. Is that the whole story, or do I need to be looking in tomorrow's Post-Gazette for that?

This sounds like it affects ALL fish, not just the "susceptible" fish, if this is the complete, unedited text.

Don't count on this being temporary, either. I wish this virus would go away, but let's be realistic.

Thankfully, French Creek is in the Allegheny River watershed, NOT the Lake Erie watershed. Even though it is in Erie County, it drains southward. This order will not affect the tentative trip we have been discussing for this summer.

I live in Ohio and I have tried to stay on top of what our Ohio Department of Natural Resources is doing with the virus. And to tell you the truth not every one sees this as a thereat. Some of the people in the division think it will blow over - and on the other hand some see it for the catastrophe it could be. I mean right now as we speak the O.D.N.R is sending fish from the Lake Erie water shed to Sothern Ohio and stocking lakes with fish they haven’t even checked or considered checking for VHS. And they will not start to look for the virus for a couple more months. What blows my mind is that they have people in the counsel that are making the bands and trying to come up with solutions for this problems ,and they themselves are not living by the rules! WE all should fallow the rules and guidelines for the time being and keep educating each outher with the new developments.

little rant

The reason for these laws isn't just to protect fish. It's to protect the environment to keep it a place that can sustain humans. That's an angle that I don't see people push enough. Everyone makes it out like the pro-animal people are a bunch of 'stupid animal lovers' that put the welfare of animals over the welfare of humans. Wake up! This is ultimately to protect us!

In Texas we have problems with fire ants, asian tiger mosquitoes and killer bees (just to list 3 non-fish problems). All brought here because of humans not being very smart. Now these things cause who-knows how many problems for PEOPLE.

Global warming isn't going to be a problem because by the time it does become a problem the entire ecosystem is going to be so reshuffled by humans that it's going to seem so so insignificant.

ummm.. I'm done, thanks.

Hear, hear.

We need to stop calling it "the environment" and start calling it what it is: "OUR environment". Might seem a little more important, then...

OK

Can anyone point to a good/complete reference describing and showing the visible symptoms of VHS? I spent a while searching the net, but wasn't all that satisfied with what I found.

I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but the white suckers I brought home from leftover icefishing bait last weekend have all died one-by-one of a ailment I'm not familiar with. The one common thing is that all wound up with very "bloodshot" looking eyes just before they died (or I decided it was time to euthanize them). I stuck them in the freezer just in case...

Thanks, Jase

Can anyone point to a good/complete reference describing and showing the visible symptoms of VHS? I spent a while searching the net, but wasn't all that satisfied with what I found.

I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but the white suckers I brought home from leftover icefishing bait last weekend have all died one-by-one of a ailment I'm not familiar with. The one common thing is that all wound up with very "bloodshot" looking eyes just before they died (or I decided it was time to euthanize them). I stuck them in the freezer just in case...

Thanks, Jase

ditto! but the FAQ answer mentions that testing has to be done cuz it looks bunch like other diseases and in 2006 it seems to only affect 37 species
http://www.aphis.usd...vhs_q_and_a.pdf

yikes!

For additional information: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/aqua/

the site moved now its:

http://www.aphis.usd...ec/aquaculture/

Okay, I have one of those wimpy computers that sometimes will and sometimes won't open things.

Can anyone tell me how to recognize VHS?

It isn't like I'm going to run out tomorrow and dump all my tropical fish into the neighboring streams. I like them and plan to let them stay around until the Man Upstairs decides otherwise. But still, I'd like to know what it looks like. If your fish does contract it, will it wipe out everyone? Will the survivors be life long carriers? How do you disinfect your tanks after an epidemic? I don't know about you, but I don't buy fish so they can die once I get them home. How long does a fish need to be quarantined prior to adding him to the tank he'll eventually call home?

Thanks!

From the Federal Register today....
-Scott


VHS, Interstate Movement and Import Restrictions

VHS- Interstate movement and import restriction


Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

RULES
Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia; Interstate Movement and Import Restrictions on Certain Live Fish,
52173–52189 [E8–20852]

[Federal Register: September 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 175)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52173-52189]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09se08-2]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 71, 83, and 93
[Docket No. APHIS-2007-0038]
RIN 0579-AC74

Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia; Interstate Movement and Import
Restrictions on Certain Live Fish

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim rule and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are establishing regulations to restrict the interstate
movement and importation into the United States of live fish that are
susceptible to viral hemorrhagic septicemia, a highly contagious
disease of certain fresh and saltwater fish. In 2005 and 2006, viral
hemorrhagic septicemia was detected in freshwater fish in several of
the Great Lakes and related tributaries. The disease has been
responsible for several large-scale die-offs of wild fish in the Great
Lakes region. This action is necessary to prevent further introductions
into, and dissemination within, the United States of viral hemorrhagic
septicemia.

DATES: Effective date: This interim rule is effective November 10, 2008.
Comment dates: Comments on the interim rule are due on or before
November 10, 2008. Comments on the environmental assessment are due on
or before October 9, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
? Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to <A HREF="http://www.regulatio...HIS-2007-0038"> http://www.regulations.gov/
fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0038</A>
to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials
available electronically.
? Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send two copies of
your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2007-0038, Regulatory Analysis and
Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to
Docket No. APHIS-2007-0038.
Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this
docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of
the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
Other Information: Additional information about APHIS and its
programs is available on the Internet at <A HREF="http://www.aphis.usda.gov"> [url="http://www.aphis.usda.gov&lt;/A&gt;"]http://www.aphis.usda.gov</A>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. P. Gary Egrie, Senior Staff
Veterinary Medical Officer, National Center for Animal Health Programs,
VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301)
734-0695; or Dr. Peter L. Merrill, Senior Staff Veterinarian, National
Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39,
Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-8364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 52174]]

Background

Viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) is a highly contagious disease
of certain fresh and saltwater fish, caused by a rhabdovirus. It is
listed as a notifiable disease by the World Organization for Animal
Health (OIE). The pathogen produces variable clinical signs in fish
including lethargy, skin darkening, exophthalmia, pale gills, a
distended abdomen, and external and internal hemorrhaging. The
development of the disease in infected fish can result in substantial
mortality. Other infected fish may not show any clinical signs or die,
but may be lifelong carriers and shed the virus.
Four genotypes of VHS virus have been identified, and appear to be
distributed geographically. Genotypes I, II, and III are mainly found
in Europe or Asia and are highly pathogenic to rainbow trout. The
fourth genotype, referred to as North American type IV, has been found
in wild fish from the East and West coasts of North America
periodically since 1988. This genotype is less virulent to commercially
important fish stocks than the European/Asian VHS virus genotypes
because it results in less morbidity and mortality than those genotypes.
In 2005 and 2006, VHS outbreaks were reported in wild fish from the
Great Lakes in both Canada and the United States. The mortality
associated with numerous individual outbreaks ranged from just a few
fish to many thousands per outbreak.
The 2005 and 2006 VHS outbreaks were the first freshwater
isolations of VHS virus in the United States. The strain of VHS virus
isolated from all of these outbreaks, while similar to North American
type IV found in saltwater, has been shown to be genetically distinct
from other known strains of VHS virus, and is apparently capable of
causing substantial morbidity and mortality in many native species of
fish. It is currently believed that the saltwater-adapted type IV
strain mutated into a strain that is affecting new host fish species in
new environments in both Canada and the United States. The extent of
VHS viral distribution is not yet known;

Edited by sschluet, 09 September 2008 - 12:48 PM.

Any fish not listed above is considered to be unsusceptible to VHS, and is legal to transport out of the listed states. It strikes me as strange that, for instance, Black crappie are susceptible, and White crappie are not.
For additional information: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/aqua/

This is the dumbest part of the whole thing. Black crappie are not listed because they have not been tested, not because they are not susceptible. Brown bullhead is on the list, but yellow an black are not?? Same reason. What is the chance that black and yellow bullhead will not be susceptible? Yellow bullhead has been captured commercially from the Lake Erie for stocking in pay lakes across the midwest (although I do not know what the current status of that fishery is). That's just dumb though. It does not make sense to allow transport of a fish that has not been tested for susceptibility. That list was based on fish that have been shown to carry the virus, not through testing of which fish can or cannot carry the virus.