Re: NANFA-- r (hellbenders plus!)

R. W. Wolff (
Sun, 11 Jan 2004 14:12:32 -0600

Here is an illustration of my pet peeve. State listing of "edge of the range
things". Fish, plants, nothing for that matter recognize man made
bounderies. Here is an example. Fundulus dispar is endangered in Wisconsin,
yet not protected in Illinois. Fundulus diaphanous is special concern (
why?) in Wisconsin, but protected in Illinois. Neither of these fish
recognize the staight line man drew on a map to divide these two states. To
top this off, these fish are not important, even as bait, so there is little
research done on their actual population dynamics. The dispar was listed in
1978, and there it sits. Meanwhile more populations and range extensions (
probably not range extensions, but we are just finding them further away
from the old sites as people know what they are and better how to find them)
are found, and the habitat has improved, but they stay listed. It doesn't
help that most surveys are done near large metro areas. You can see his in
maps of many fish, the dots increase considerably near large cities,
wouldn't one think that it would be the opposite?

> The problem I see in general and in particular with the
> hellbender is that many information is "only" local or regional and does
> reflect to the overall situation.

/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ For a digest version, send the command to
/ instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,