Why you should NEVER release any fish

[teleost]

Actually If you were consummate with your reading ability enough to notice I was referring to the act of government stocking lakes.

Let me guess...you meant to say "ponds" not lakes right? You're mouth is larger than your brain for sure. Lakes are typically formed by rivers/streams and a pond is fueled ground or rainwater typically. Lakes indeed have rivers and streams that flow into and out of them. Water is water when it comes right down to it Vexter. Floods happen.....have water will travel. It's impossible to undo what so many states have done with hatchery fish both native and non native alike.

 

[vexter]

The lives of people before fish? That's a joke. I highly doubt the people of NY need brown and rainbow trout in order to survive. If trout were critical to their survival however there are perfectly good lake and brook trout to be eaten. Likewise, I doubt the people of California needed largemouth bass. I want to know what region you're speaking of that NEED Fish&Game to stock their lake in order for them to survive.

Sorry for not explaining myself. The place I speak of is Earth, you might have heard of it.

WWF

Worldwide, marine and freshwater fisheries
generate over US$130 billion annually,
employ at least 200 million people, and feed billions of people who rely on fish as their
primary source of protein, particularly in some of the most populous and poorest countries on the planet.

(http://assets.panda.org/downloads/fisherie_web_final.pdf)

NPR

Fish farms have been a boon to fish lovers around the world. About 30 percent of the seafood eaten in the United States this year will come from so-called "aquaculture" farms, most of them in Asia.

Or hey, maybe you don't believe fish farms to be as good as cattle farms?
USAID would beg to differ

The world’s 1.3 billion cattle are likewise a significant component of the water-for-food budget, requiring 7 kg of grain for every 1 kg of live weight. ... In contrast, fish require on average 2 kilograms of grain to add 1 kilogram of live weight, and are therefore more “water efficient” as an animal protein source.

(http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/water/food_security.html)

Hmm appears that you are wrong. I understand you might not have had a chance to learn about the other countries and do not have a world perspective but I mean this stuff is basic. So much of the worlds population is dependent on fish especially places that are facing famine. Fair enough America does not have nearly the famine problems as Africa. The problem facing the United States of Obesity is the fact that

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Approximately 127 million adults in the U.S. are overweight, 60 million obese, and 9 million severely obese.

(http://www.obesity.org/subs/fastfacts/obesity_US.shtml)
[/FONT]
Little wonder why you are unfamiliar with the world's famine and starving. But thats not the point, The point is huge numbers of people need fish farms to be able to survive. Maybe you don't care about the billions of people that rely on fish farming but those people that eat fish as a daily staple in their diet might.

Your statement was uneducated, narrow minded and stupid. If you can call that a try, I can say it was a nice one.

 

[sandtiger]

Sorry for not explaining myself. The place I speak of is Earth, you might have heard of it.

WWF

(http://assets.panda.org/downloads/fisherie_web_final.pdf)

NPR



Or hey, maybe you don't believe fish farms to be as good as cattle farms?
USAID would beg to differ

(http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/water/food_security.html)

Hmm appears that you are wrong. I understand you might not have had a chance to learn about the other countries and do not have a world perspective but I mean this stuff is basic. So much of the worlds population is dependent on fish especially places that are facing famine. Fair enough America does not have nearly the famine problems as Africa. The problem facing the United States of Obesity is the fact that

(http://www.obesity.org/subs/fastfacts/obesity_US.shtml)
[/SIZE][/FONT]
Little wonder why you are unfamiliar with the world's famine and starving. But thats not the point, The point is huge numbers of people need fish farms to be able to survive. Maybe you don't care about the billions of people that rely on fish farming but those people that eat fish as a daily staple in their diet might.

Your statement was uneducated, narrow minded and stupid. If you can call that a try, I can say it was a nice one.

This forum is about "Coldwater, Temperate and North American native fishes" and this thread in particular is about releasing fishes both native and non-native back into the wild within North America. We're talking about stocking non-native fish in NA and releaseing fish back into the wild, not aquaculture in third world countries. I suggest you stick to the topic at hand.

 

[mjmc]

I completely understand your thinking. But my whole point has been
that if a sunfish can be mistreated and contract a disease and then
released, it has happened. Our native waters in Ohio are doing fine
I actually contacted the Division of Wildlife here in Ohio. It is
only illegal to release animals on public land. You can release
whatever you want as long as it's on private land. How much sense
does that make, and how serious are they concerned with the spread of
disease? I can legally release a minnow in the creek that runs along my parents' property, and the fish can swim down into, eventually, the Ohio River.
I also can appreciate researching an animal prior to obtaining one
(whether buying or catching). But lots of kids don't have parents, either at all or who are as interested as ewurm's father. While expecting parents to parent is an ideal situation, realism does set in. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce. What percentage of single parent mom or dad has time (even if he cares) to educate himself about whether an animal will make a good pet? C'mon guys, wake up, you're living in a fantasy world.
Sandtiger, do you mean that if your child brought home a snapping turtle hatchling, that you would require she keep it its entire life? That turtle could still be alive when he was eighty-five
All this talk of stuff being illegal. Do you continuously obey the speed limit? Not one mile over? Give me a break. Let you without sin cast the first stone. If you were to be found guilty of releasing a fish into the same stream you caught it in, you would face the same punishment someone speeding or caught with a joint would face--a fine.
All this talk of stuff being illegal. Do you continuously obey the speed limit? Not one mile over? Give me a break. Let you without sin cast the first stone. If you were to be found guilty of releasing a fish into the same stream you caught it in, you would face the same punishment someone speeding or caught with a joint would face--a fine.[/

 

[TheBloodyIrish]

What percentage of single parent mom or dad has time (even if he cares) to educate himself about whether an animal will make a good pet? C'mon guys, wake up, you're living in a fantasy world.

Actually, the Wild Management are quite powerful in North America. Most parents nowaday advise kids not to bring pets home because they don't wanna get caught. My nextdoor neighour's kid brought a garter snake home, her mom told her not to bring it home because keeping them is illegal, and they handed it over to the local officer. The local office said it was okay, she did the right thing and she wouldn't get in trouble.

The mom ended up having to go to court about her fine for keeping without a permit a month later. Apperntly it was a different officer that issued the fine. She won the case, by the way.

The mom did a smart thing by doing the right thing, but she still ended up with a heavy fine because of her kid.

I actually contacted the Division of Wildlife here in Ohio. It is
only illegal to release animals on public land. You can release
whatever you want as long as it's on private land. How much sense
does that make, and how serious are they concerned with the spread of
disease? I can legally release a minnow in the creek that runs along my parents' property, and the fish can swim down into, eventually, the Ohio River.

Legal or not, there are people that still release their pets. We are trying to send a message that it would be unwise to do so.

Sandtiger, do you mean that if your child brought home a snapping turtle hatchling, that you would require she keep it its entire life? That turtle could still be alive when he was eighty-five!

That's where you have to put it down or give it to another RESPONSIBLE pet owner. Beside if he really meant for life, he meant as long the kid is still a minor.

All this talk of stuff being illegal. Do you continuously obey the speed limit? Not one mile over? Give me a break. Let you without sin cast the first stone. If you were to be found guilty of releasing a fish into the same stream you caught it in, you would face the same punishment someone speeding or caught with a joint would face--a fine.

The fines for releasing an animal is more severe than drug use or speeding.

 

[teleost]

I actually contacted the Division of Wildlife here in Ohio. It is
only illegal to release animals on public land. You can release
whatever you want as long as it's on private land. How much sense
does that make, and how serious are they concerned with the spread of
disease? I can legally release a minnow in the creek that runs along my parents' property, and the fish can swim down into, eventually, the Ohio River.

Can you please tell us exactly who you spoke to and when?

Did you specifically say you wanted to place the fish in flowing waters of the state?

In bold the DNR website says:

It is unlawful to transport and introduce any aquatic species (fish, invertebrate, plant) from one body of water to another.

Link:http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/wildlife/regs/fishregs/default.htm

I also can appreciate researching an animal prior to obtaining one
(whether buying or catching). But lots of kids don't have parents, either at all or who are as interested as ewurm's father. While expecting parents to parent is an ideal situation, realism does set in. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce. What percentage of single parent mom or dad has time (even if he cares) to educate himself about whether an animal will make a good pet? C'mon guys, wake up, you're living in a fantasy world.

Social ill's have no bearing on right and wrong. Making excuses for single parent families only perpetuates victimization. Excuse me for asking forum members to behave in an environmentally responsible manner. If that's living in a fantasy world, then I'll be happy to clib back into my shell. This forum is after all dedicated to keeping coldwater and North American Native Fishes in the home aquaria and all aspects relating to them. Seems like a good place to discuss what happens when you relese fish since the wild is where our pets come from.

All this talk of stuff being illegal. Do you continuously obey the speed limit? Not one mile over? Give me a break. Let you without sin cast the first stone. If you were to be found guilty of releasing a fish into the same stream you caught it in, you would face the same punishment someone speeding or caught with a joint would face--a fine.

Speeding under most circumstances has no effect on anyone but the driver and the vehicles' passengers (no long term effects). The same could be said of a joint. moving fishes from one body of water to another/releasing potentially diseased fishes clearly has long term effects for all citizens. This is a particularly bad analogy. A better analogy might be something along the lines of a guy spraying radioactive material in public parks...well even that's not a good analogy since the radiation levels would drop in time whereas once you dilute the fishes or lose a species, you can't change that no matter how long you wait.

This isn't about reaching all people, it's about reaching people reading this! Since people here have discussed releasing fish into the wild and it's also obvious many tropical releases occur every year on a national level, this is a perfect place to try to promote responsible practices.

Why is it so hard to just say "It's not good to release fish or any aquatic life under any circumstances"? Instead you want to make excuses for every dumb thing people do and play to the irresponsible tenancies of the uninformed. Is everything in your world Grey! take off the glasses and try to see just one thing in black and white.

 

[Polypterus]

I actually contacted the Division of Wildlife here in Ohio. It is
only illegal to release animals on public land. You can release
whatever you want as long as it's on private land. How much sense
does that make, and how serious are they concerned with the spread of
disease? I can legally release a minnow in the creek that runs along my parents' property, and the fish can swim down into, eventually, the Ohio River.

Actually the text of the Ohio law Reads:

It shall be unlawful for any person to release any fish or aquatic insect into waters of the state, or waters under control of the division of wildlife without first obtaining permission from the chief of the division of wildlife.

http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/1501:31-13

This means any water connected to or being part of the juristiction of the state of Ohio. The only case where release would be allowed, without permit, would be in ones own pond that is on their property and does not connect to public waters in any way.

Navigable Water is "common" law and placed in public trust by the state and federal government. which means that it cannot be owned unless fully contained on ones property. One can own property on a river or stream or lake and even own the land below it, but they can not own the water it's self or the fauna in it.

The above seneario of releasing a fish on your parent's property into a river, lake or stream connected to public trust water would by definition of Ohio law be Illegal and is prohibited.

 

[Polypterus]

Why is it so hard to just say "It's not good to release fish or any aquatic life under any circumstances"?

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.

This truly is not rocket science to understand is it?

 

[sandtiger]

I completely understand your thinking. But my whole point has been
that if a sunfish can be mistreated and contract a disease and then
released, it has happened. Our native waters in Ohio are doing fine.

Doing fine? Please, define for me what "doing fine" means? If it means habitat destruction, pollution, endangered species, disease outbreaks and alien invasives then yeah, I guess it is doing fine. The aquatic environment is a very complex system. You visit a creek and think it's healthy simply because there are fish swimming around but in reality you have no idea what is going on in there and for all you know, it may be falling apart. What is said child released diseased sunfish and the creek it comes from just so happens to be home to an endangered species and it kills off half the population? Endangered species exist for a reason, it's becuase people do stupid things.

I also can appreciate researching an animal prior to obtaining one
(whether buying or catching). But lots of kids don't have parents, either at all or who are as interested as ewurm's father. While expecting parents to parent is an ideal situation, realism does set in. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce. What percentage of single parent mom or dad has time (even if he cares) to educate himself about whether an animal will make a good pet? C'mon guys, wake up, you're living in a fantasy world.

I don't want to hear that as an excuse and I am fully aware of the fact that people will continue to do stupid things regardless of what you tell them. However, here on this forum we can educate people. People who commonly take animals from the wild. All you're doing is telling them it's alright to do illegal and possably harmful things that could effect the ecosystem.

Sandtiger, do you mean that if your child brought home a snapping turtle hatchling, that you would require she keep it its entire life? That turtle could still be alive when he was eighty-five!

I hope to educate my child before he's old enough to be looking for wildlife by himself. If he did bring home a snapping turtle hatchling he would have to release it immediatly. I got my first pet when I was 7, I'm now 23 and still have the same animal, a red eared slider.

All this talk of stuff being illegal. Do you continuously obey the speed limit? Not one mile over? Give me a break. Let you without sin cast the first stone. If you were to be found guilty of releasing a fish into the same stream you caught it in, you would face the same punishment someone speeding or caught with a joint would face--a fine.

 

[Skipjack]

WOW! What can I say. I cannot believe that anyone would argue against "the no release ethic". When this thread started, I thought that this policy was a given amongst native fish keepers, and the ecologically minded.

Now I have to wonder " do these folks argueing against this ethic actually advocate release of fish?" Heck, maybe we should just release them all. Maybe I should keep a bucket of fish in my vehicle, so that whenever I pass over a bridge, I won't miss the opportunity to dump a few in. We are humans after all, and superior to all other species on this planet. So maybe we should just play GOD. Even better if I could make a $buck$ throwing fish around where they do not belong.

I am apalled that something so simple to grasp, seems so hard for some of you! The topic of the thread says it all. They should never be released. Period. Not by children, not by the DNR. I guarantee that neither one of my boys will ever, in their lifetimes bring a fish home, keep it for a period of time, and release it. But then they are fortunate to get in the water with me nearly every single week of the year. Those parents allowing this are simply not doing thier jobs. Please do not make excuses for them. This is clearcut. there is no room for argument. Please stop.