Re: NANFA-L-- Old story, new twist?
Mon, 15 May 2006 10:39:34 EDT

In a message dated 5/15/2006 10:22:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

My argument against this is fairly simple:

The only way for a new species to survive in a foreign ecosystem is to
out-compete a species that is already present. I do not think degrading
the habitat of native fish that happen to be of plenty now is a wise way
of conserving alien fish which are threatened. Seems like you will just
be creating another potential threatened species.

I understand you argument but eco niches are hardly filled up in the North
American River systems, not like the
Amazon. My main concern is with the small sturgeon of course, they could be
estblished in streams that flow directly to the ocean that have no chance of
ever recruting their native sturgeon if any. With the dirth of sturgeon,
especially small sturgeon I think there would be room for them. Carp would be
their prime nemesis of course. I of course have a stream in mind for the small
sturgeon and a predatory paddle fish that lives with carp naturally just might
be the thing to bring the mighty carp under control. Lets face it, the
ecosystem of the Mississippi is a shambles compared to what it was 300 years ago.
it will never recover on it;s own. Why not add a few exotics to make up for
the fish we have lost and maybe save the exotics in the bargain it's sure
better than stocking fish that decimate the ecosystem just so anglers can catch an
odd fish.

/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association (NANFA). Comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of NANFA. For more information about NANFA,
/ visit Please make sure all posts to nanfa-l are
/ consistent with the guidelines as per
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get
/ help, visit the NANFA email list home page and archive at