Dangers of Releasing Captive Fishes

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sandtiger

Captain Planet
MFK Member
Feb 14, 2005
3,563
4
0
41
NY
I have read through the previous sticky about the same topic and have placed here what I consider to be valuable information. I want this thread to stay clean and I will be keeping a very close eye on it. Valid questions are alright but breaking the rules and promoting illegal activies (releasing fish into the wild) will not be tolerated.
If members have any more examples, reasons or stories on why fish should not be released feel free to post them here.
 
This subject seems to come up often but I can't recall a dedicated thread for it. Each and every state in the union has laws against release of any fish (native or otherwise) into the natural waters of the state. The law will usually read something like this..."May release fish immediately upon capture into the waters from which it was removed". There are so many points to cover when talking about this horrible practice I think I'll only try and begin cover one for now.

In the image you'll see two little headwater creeks in my home state. If you were to take fish from one stream and place them in the other you might think what the heck...the streams are within walking distance, what could that hurt. This might be walking distance for you and me but these two creeks happen to be separated by over 1000 river miles. The fish the live in these streams might look the same to you and me but I'll be in the future we might learn these fish have distinct attributes that time from living this great water distance apart have created. If the fishes that you introduce spawn with the existing and potentially distinct population the fish are permanently destroyed. This is simply something you cannot "undo"

Since this just one aspect (that even hasn't been fully covered) I hope others can add to the list of damaging effects release can bring to not only the wild fish but our hobby as a whole.
Click to expand...
--Teleost

Teleost has stated one of the most important arguments for not releasing fish. LOSS OF GENETIC DIVERSITY.
I will delve into disease issues, another important one.
Anyone ever hear about how Native Americans were heavily aflicted with smallpox after the white man came to North America? Europeans, had developed a fairly good resistance to the disease, but Native Americans, never having been exposed to the disease were nearly wiped out in a given village.
Our native fish have ZERO resistance to diseases that seem minor to tropical fish, or even from fish introduced from another region.
Release of fish that have been captive, could introduce pathogens into our waterways, and cause major fish kills. This has been exibited with the recent outbreak of VHS in the great lakes.
If you are interested in keeping native fish you should be responsible enough to be a friend to them also, and insure that you never allow this to happen.
Release of captive native fish is NOT AN OPTION!
If you release fish, you are no friend to our native fish, and it would be best that you remove yourself from the native fish hobby.
Click to expand...
--Skipjack

so when the DFG stocks fish their commiting a crime right? and after these fish are stocked they breed with the native populations (its not like they stick together or anything) this is specially true with bass, sunfish, and catfish.

Im not so sure that all this talk of messing with the genes of the species is THE REASON to not let fish go in local water ways.

it also has to do with non native fish possibly taking over, introducing diseases to the population and also the fish you release could very well die in a matter of days (not that that would effect the echosystem, but you raised this fish and thought you were giving it a better lif only for it to die son after).
Click to expand...
--nativelover

Back in the 1800's pioneers came to live in the area around the Twin Lakes Reservoir, home of the Yellowfin cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki macdonaldi), a subspecies of cutthroat trout that exists in no other place in the world other then the Twin lakes resevoir. Because of fishing and stocking of non-native trout (rainbow, brown and lake trout) this subspecies, genetically isolated for so many years went extinct within 20 years.
Fish and Game have no buisness stocking fish. Brown trout don't belong in the U.S. Largemouth bass and bluegill don't belong on the Pacific coast. Rainbow trout don't belong in the east and brook trout don't belong in the west. What they have done and continue to do are IMO crimes against nature and proof that they are working for the almighty doller (the fishermen's dollers) and not for the natural world
Click to expand...
.
--Sandtiger

I have to also agree that Local DNR's are guilty of crimes against wildlife. Here in Ohio we have a disjunct population of the Tonguetied minnow, a state endangered fish. It is so far disjunct from other populations of Tonguetied minnows that it is likely that if the time, and money were invested, that it would be found to be a distinct species. Nonetheless, the ODNR continues to stock brown trout in the only drainage that holds a decent population of this fish. BROWN TROUT! A European native.
Nobody, not the DNR, not you, not me have the right to play god, or mother nature, whatever your conviction.
Click to expand...
--Skipjack

also, releasing fish into the wild is not ok because there are types of fungus that attack aquarium fish that are not found in the wild.

In Massachusetts, those fungi attack our local amphibian species too and they are on the decline.
Click to expand...
--Meepster

It never fails to amaze me how most fish hobbyists feel it is their solemn duty to perpetuate and carry on what are obviously destructive and irrational behaviors. It also seems to be habitual to ignore or purposely forget that wild ecosystems are very complex. Natural systems both aquatic and terrestrial are not the simplified man made representations that are called Aquariums or terrariums.

There is overwhelming evidence that the transfer of one organism from one body of water to another carries risk and can potentially be disastrous to a given ecosystem. These risks are very broad and there is not just one set of detriments or one set of effects that apply in all cases. Released organisms often cause different sets of disruptions depending on species, origin and waters it is being introduced to. Some species or the situation / origin of that species prior to release can cause bigger more profound issues than others. This is not made up this is empirically proven fact.

It is also proven that holding an animal in captivity without sanitized, monitored and controlled conditions can and will influence the health of that animal both physically and psychologically. Unless an animal is held in conditions that are suitable to it, with the goal of eventual release being the outcome of it’s disposal, it should not be released.

Before anyone says it I have one statement of state and federal level stocking:
Private, state and federal hatcheries are held to high levels of quarantine, quality control, accountability and health management. They are multi-million dollar facilities with advanced husbandry and health care staff trained in Fish culture. There is no comparison between a hobby release of a species be it native or not and the systems used by state and federal stocking. Conversation in this is a distraction from the true issue here. I do not agree with the outcome of these stockings at times (Brown trout) but there is a big difference between state stocked fish and an unwanted "pet" fish.

Fish hobbyists are not trained professionals in the field of appropriate and controlled husbandry and release of organisms into the wild. Therefore they have no business in releasing anything.
Click to expand...
--Polyopterus

This is a reply to me from wildlife headquarters, law enforcement division.

Matt,

OAC 1501:31-13-01 (A) (7) states that it is unlawful to release any fish or aquatic insect into the waters of the state or any area under control of the division of wildlife. (This would include all rivers, streams, creeks etc... in addition to any place a fishing license is required). Fish can be released into private impoundments.

It also states in our fishing digest and OAC that its unlawful to transport and introduce any aquatic species (fish, invertebrate, plant) from one body of water to another.

Any more questions feel free to call

Kirk Kiefer
Ohio Division of Wildlife
Click to expand...
--Skipjack
 
The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen.
The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.

We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.

One last thing and I will not post again, uncalled. Suppose I take your educated word that there are diseases in native tanks that could be unleased into the native environment. There are millions of tanks in the US alone. Surely there are studies that have proven this time and time again, where a disease has been found in the water to be the result of a private individual. Please provide links and evidence. Enough with the "I believe, you believe". Let's see empirical proof.


 
mjmc;871266; said:
The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen.
The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.

We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.

One last thing and I will not post again, uncalled. Suppose I take your educated word that there are diseases in native tanks that could be unleased into the native environment. There are millions of tanks in the US alone. Surely there are studies that have proven this time and time again, where a disease has been found in the water to be the result of a private individual. Please provide links and evidence. Enough with the "I believe, you believe". Let's see empirical proof.


Click to expand...

Are you aware of LMBV, VHS, Whirling disease and SVC ???? All of these are transfered through Bait release and fish to fish cross contamination. Does anything more need to be said about this???
 
mjmc;871266; said:
The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen.
The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.

We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.

One last thing and I will not post again, uncalled. Suppose I take your educated word that there are diseases in native tanks that could be unleased into the native environment. There are millions of tanks in the US alone. Surely there are studies that have proven this time and time again, where a disease has been found in the water to be the result of a private individual. Please provide links and evidence. Enough with the "I believe, you believe". Let's see empirical proof.


Click to expand...

It's not worth the risk and it's ILLEGAL, 'nuff said. I will not have another arguement on this thread so I do hope this ends now. I can delete a post faster then I can reply.
 
Polypterus;871283; said:
Are you aware of LMBV, VHS, Whirling disease and SVC ???? All of these are transfered through Bait release and fish to fish cross contamination. Does anything more need to be said about this???
Click to expand...

I don't believe anything more has to be said about it. It is simply laziness and ignorance vs. rational thought. Releasing captive fish definitely does not improve the environment, I believe we can all agree on that. So what exactly is the argument?
 
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070520/SPORTS10/705200665/1048
http://hotitems.oar.noaa.gov/storyDetail_org.php?sid=4224

I can keep going on and on and on how uninformed INDIVIDUALS spread and continue to spread Pathogens and invasive species....How this is an argument is beyond me..There is so much evidence that the Release of an animal kept in captivity and moved from one location to another is detrimental it is not funny....Try Google and actually learn about these issues.
 
Polypterus;871283; said:
Are you aware of LMBV, VHS, Whirling disease and SVC ???? All of these are transfered through Bait release and fish to fish cross contamination. Does anything more need to be said about this???
Click to expand...


That's great. Now bring something relevant.

All of the diseases you mention have absolutely zero to do with keeping a native tank and releasing the same fish you kept for a while in the same exact spot he was captured in. Do you read before your fingers spew forth such vomitous? How can you possibly post that as a response to my post? Are you kidding me? No one is deceived. I asked specifically for evidence of disease spread from a native tank (where everything in the tank was native from the same spot).


VHS-"presumably arriving with frozen fish shipments from Europe" (http://www.ncrac.org/NR/rdonlyres/3CBECF1E-2AE0-4661-9C08-29A0A15DE403/26267/Whirling2.pdf)

Whirling disease- “Because whirling disease originated in Europe” (http://www.whirling-disease.org/research_resistanttrout.htm)

SVC-origin unknown, but “SVC has previously been reported in western and eastern Europe” (http://govdocs.aquake.org/cgi/reprint/2003/521/5210050.pdf)


LMBV-origin unknown-Could this possibly be your phantom private aquaria disease! Perhaps you could say that this was the result of exactly what I intend to do. You have no proof or evidence to back up anything else you say regarding my queries, what makes this any different? (http://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/fisheries/afm/2006/3x07_25sayers.htm)




I'll give you the scenario again, as apparently you have either forgotten or are dodging. I catch a minnow and keep it for six months with other natives caught from the same location. My daughter and I identify it, watch it grow, eat and learn a lot about it in general. Then I let it go exactly where I caught it to try and catch something different. What could “LMBV, VHS, Whirling disease and SVC" possibly have to do with this scenario? What? Show me empirical proof! Examples of diseases imported from European goldfish, ballast-transported diseases and diseases resulting from moving fish from one body of water to another are completely irrelevant. Focus! Quit dodging the topic. If you have no proof, simply say so! I read your posts, but hear ‘The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

Maybe with sandtiger gone now, these posts will not be censored. Opposing viewpoints and intelligent discussion are a good thing. I have changed my mind on some issues based on some of the info I’ve got from these posts. Good riddance. Take your fascism elsewhere.
 
mjmc;879724; said:


That's great. Now bring something relevant.

All of the diseases you mention have absolutely zero to do with keeping a native tank and releasing the same fish you kept for a while in the same exact spot he was captured in. Do you read before your fingers spew forth such vomitous? How can you possibly post that as a response to my post? Are you kidding me? No one is deceived. I asked specifically for evidence of disease spread from a native tank (where everything in the tank was native from the same spot).


VHS-"presumably arriving with frozen fish shipments from Europe" (http://www.ncrac.org/NR/rdonlyres/3CBECF1E-2AE0-4661-9C08-29A0A15DE403/26267/Whirling2.pdf)

Whirling disease- “Because whirling disease originated in Europe” (http://www.whirling-disease.org/research_resistanttrout.htm)

SVC-origin unknown, but “SVC has previously been reported in western and eastern Europe” (http://govdocs.aquake.org/cgi/reprint/2003/521/5210050.pdf)


LMBV-origin unknown-Could this possibly be your phantom private aquaria disease! Perhaps you could say that this was the result of exactly what I intend to do. You have no proof or evidence to back up anything else you say regarding my queries, what makes this any different? (http://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/fisheries/afm/2006/3x07_25sayers.htm)




I'll give you the scenario again, as apparently you have either forgotten or are dodging. I catch a minnow and keep it for six months with other natives caught from the same location. My daughter and I identify it, watch it grow, eat and learn a lot about it in general. Then I let it go exactly where I caught it to try and catch something different. What could “LMBV, VHS, Whirling disease and SVC" possibly have to do with this scenario? What? Show me empirical proof! Examples of diseases imported from European goldfish, ballast-transported diseases and diseases resulting from moving fish from one body of water to another are completely irrelevant. Focus! Quit dodging the topic. If you have no proof, simply say so! I read your posts, but hear ‘The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

Maybe with sandtiger gone now, these posts will not be censored. Opposing viewpoints and intelligent discussion are a good thing. I have changed my mind on some issues based on some of the info I’ve got from these posts. Good riddance. Take your fascism elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I don't see why you have to argue that point. The point of the post is to inform people. If you disagree, then go ahead and dump your fish. You won't earn my respect for it, but you don't need it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom