Pacu caught by kid in CA- news segment

[Trouser Cough]

IMHumO, the solution is neither looking the other way, nor legal restrictions (both are ugly), but raising awareness for each and all fish buyers, like a banner on each store and a post-it on each fish tank in the store "Never, ever release any fish in the wild!" Also maybe place it in school biology class curriculum and run ads online and on TV.

Otherwise it is EITHER the continued slow destruction of ecosystems OR a white list of two dozen legal fish to keep and everything else banned.

I understand what you mean and I don't want anyone else to think they need to believe as I do but your comment raises a question. A month or so back someone posted on this site a video of three not particularly smart Asian kids that bought goldfish at a pet shop and then video'd themselves 'freeing' the goldfish in a local body of water. Assuming there will always be children and some others that may see rules as applying to others how should those that don't agree with your post it notes be disciplined given the generations of ecological damage they could easily introduce?

The question is a little tongue in cheek given the fact that FL F&G bred and introduced their own sanctioned scourge as if they're smart enough to manipulate nature by doing what they've written laws against.

 

[Trouser Cough]

And therein lies the problem.

Without consequences there's no accountability and we all know too many folks that don't hold themselves accountable for much.

I agree that I don't like rules much but I enjoy less watching others get away w/ crimes against nature.

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

I don't have a worked-out fictitious solution to every aspect of my fictitious proposal. The offenders can be subject to a variety of consequences, perhaps being taught, cleaning up their mess on their / their parents bill, and apologizing publicly.

 

[Joshuakahan]

And therein lies the problem.

Without consequences there's no accountability and we all know too many folks that don't hold themselves accountable for much.

I agree that I don't like rules much but I enjoy less watching others get away w/ crimes against nature.

I think banning fish because of a few is just laziness. It’s the equivalent of a school teacher punishing the entire class because one kid does something and the teacher doesn’t know which kid.
I think instead of banning fish etc…just make the punishment if you’re caught releasing a non native species so over the top ridiculously extreme that nobody would risk it.

 

[Trouser Cough]

In Europe river ecology has largely been destroyed by the introduction of a non-native self cloning crawfish that has decimated native inverts. Odd to think that rules wouldn't have prevented that, no amount of clean up effort will reverse the issue and apologies won't repair the damage done.

Rules won't hurt as much as irresponsible keepers. Beyond that I'm not sure there's a solution.

Marmokrebs are taking over the world

 

[Joshuakahan]

In Europe river ecology has largely been destroyed by the introduction of a non-native self cloning crawfish that has decimated native inverts. Odd to think that rules wouldn't have prevented that, no amount of clean up effort will reverse the issue and apologies won't repair the damage done.

Rules won't hurt as much as irresponsible keepers. Beyond that I'm not sure there's a solution.

Marmokrebs are taking over the world

There really isn’t a solution, but placing the blame on the keepers isn’t accurate. The majority of the problems in FL are because of a hurricane causing many fish and reptiles to escape. But really IMO, when human’s started traveling the globe, that’s what did a lot of the damage, there was always going to be hitchhikers. Maybe it’s not an ecosystem being destroyed, maybe it’s an ecosystem evolving into something different. Outside influences have always effected eco systems. That’s my take anyway.

 

[jjohnwm]

I think banning fish because of a few is just laziness. It’s the equivalent of a school teacher punishing the entire class because one kid does something and the teacher doesn’t know which kid.
I think instead of banning fish etc…just make the punishment if you’re caught releasing a non native species so over the top ridiculously extreme that nobody would risk it.

Of course it could be characterized as laziness...but it might be more accurate to call it an overabundance of caution. Who cares how extreme the punishment is for the crime of introducing a potentially devastating invasive is? There is always someone who will do it, either for the thrill of flouting authority, or out of ignorance of the danger and of the law, or even entirely by accident. After it occurs, punishment or not...that genie is not going back into that bottle.

It's generally accepted that capital punishment is not an effective deterrent for preventing the crime of murder. Considering that...imagine the worst possible penalty for an environmental crime, and then tell me that it will be an effective deterrent for that.

I'm as guilty as most here of being saddened by legislation that cramps my style when it comes to choosing species of fish I can keep...and I am at least as cautious and wary of governmental over-reach as anybody. I find myself smirking and rolling my eyes when the government rolls out bans so extreme that they are comparable to killing a fly with a sledgehammer...I react that way to a lot of government moves.

But, when the fly really, really needs killing...i.e. when the chance of an invasive introduction is even a remote possibility...I'd much rather see the overkill. Better too much than not enough.

There really isn’t a solution, but placing the blame on the keepers isn’t accurate. The majority of the problems in FL are because of a hurricane causing many fish and reptiles to escape. But really IMO, when human’s started traveling the globe, that’s what did a lot of the damage, there was always going to be hitchhikers. Maybe it’s not an ecosystem being destroyed, maybe it’s an ecosystem evolving into something different. Outside influences have always effected eco systems. That’s my take anyway.

Hitchhikers have always been a problem; look at rats colonizing the world via ship; look at things like the Spiny Water Flea in the Great lakes, getting there in the ballast water of ships. So of course, restrictions have tightened in an effort to combat such modes of introduction.

A hurricane releasing exotics in Florida is not natural selection; those critters wouldn't have been there to be released in the first place if keepers hadn't had them...and the ecosystem there is not "evolving"; it's being influenced in un-natural ways and directions by people.

Just sitting back and saying "S**t happens!" simply can't be accepted when we have created the set of circumstances that allows that s**t to happen.

No solution? Maybe not for combating existing infestations of exotics...but that's no excuse for not trying to prevent making the same mistakes over and over again.

 

[Joshuakahan]

Of course it could be characterized as laziness...but it might be more accurate to call it an overabundance of caution. Who cares how extreme the punishment is for the crime of introducing a potentially devastating invasive is? There is always someone who will do it, either for the thrill of flouting authority, or out of ignorance of the danger and of the law, or even entirely by accident. After it occurs, punishment or not...that genie is not going back into that bottle.

It's generally accepted that capital punishment is not an effective deterrent for preventing the crime of murder. Considering that...imagine the worst possible penalty for an environmental crime, and then tell me that it will be an effective deterrent for that.

I'm as guilty as most here of being saddened by legislation that cramps my style when it comes to choosing species of fish I can keep...and I am at least as cautious and wary of governmental over-reach as anybody. I find myself smirking and rolling my eyes when the government rolls out bans so extreme that they are comparable to killing a fly with a sledgehammer...I react that way to a lot of government moves.

But, when the fly really, really needs killing...i.e. when the chance of an invasive introduction is even a remote possibility...I'd much rather see the overkill. Better too much than not enough.




Hitchhikers have always been a problem; look at rats colonizing the world via ship; look at things like the Spiny Water Flea in the Great lakes, getting there in the ballast water of ships. So of course, restrictions have tightened in an effort to combat such modes of introduction.

A hurricane releasing exotics in Florida is not natural selection; those critters wouldn't have been there to be released in the first place if keepers hadn't had them...and the ecosystem there is not "evolving"; it's being influenced in un-natural ways and directions by people.

Just sitting back and saying "S**t happens!" simply can't be accepted when we have created the set of circumstances that allows that s**t to happen.

No solution? Maybe not for combating existing infestations of exotics...but that's no excuse for not trying to prevent making the same mistakes over and over again.

Maybe if these laws were made by zoologists and enforced by zoologists or someone with a decent understanding of wildlife, I’d be more inclined to agree with legislation, but the laws are made by politicians reacting to incidents like this one and fish n game training is mostly law enforcement training and they have just enough knowledge of individual species to make big mistakes. I guarantee most of us here have much more knowledge about fish than those making and enforcing the laws.
A great example is in AZ, sharks are banned. Probably because of bull sharks being known to swim up rivers, but instead of looking more into it, the politicians freak out and ban sharks as a whole.