Re: NANFA--now pet peeve

R. W. Wolff (
Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:25:18 -0600

They list reasons at the web site, which is pretty good. It has an info page
on each specie that is T or E, atleast a line drawing of " higher" animals,
pics of some plants etc. The reasons are vague news bite kind of things. "
Work needs to be done to stop turbidity in waters". I have not actually
called them and asked what is going on. I think it might be that. The areas
the species I mention have lots of suitable habitat, although not always
connected. Especially species found upstream, it is reasonable to assume
they are downstream. Floods usually take fish to places they wouldn't go

My solution other than the obvious, enforce water quality laws, is for the
state to do some relocation. I would bet most species suitable for this
would take off and flourish. It has worked in other states. I know, costs
money and time, but it is cheaper and takes less time than devoting hatchery
space or just waiting it out.


> Have you tried asking your DOW as to the reasonings behind the species
> listed? Or is it just a throwback from when (if) they were less numerous?
> Nick >
/"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,