Re: NANFA-- Bluenose shiner news

Bruce Stallsmith (
Wed, 10 Sep 2003 08:40:07 -0400

It's true that NANFA can't declare moratoriums. But NANFAns should be aware
that, as Gene Helfman describes in the new AC, species are listed with
formal protection only after they're in trouble. The "Special Concern"
category receives no formal protection, and is often made up of species well
on their way towards extirpation or extinction. Species can be locally
abundant but at the same time are going through a range contraction. I've
come up against this lately with freshwater mussels in the Tennessee River
in a project I'm working on. We can find steady numbres of some local
species in a stretch of the river, but they've disappeared in many other

Be mindful. Things change quickly.

--Bruce Stallsmith
Huntsville, AL, US of A

>From: "Todd Crail" <>
>To: <>
>Subject: Re: NANFA-- Bluenose shiner news
>Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 22:14:11 -0400
>NANFA doesn't exist to declare moratoriums. There's plenty of Federal,
>State and Private agencies that _do_ exactly that... One which their
>listings of imperiled organisms bluntly states those listed organisms are
>exactly that... imperiled. One that still seemed to be in shades of gray
>and rationalized in your rebuttal. Perhaps it's a shade of blue now?
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Irate Mormon" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 12:03 AM
>Subject: NANFA-- Bluenose shiner news
> > I had a rather disturbing conversation with one of my friends at the
>Mississippi Museum of Natural Science yesterday. It seems that
> > somebody has been plundering welaka for the "Pet Trade". Mike suspects
>that a "German aquarist" is responsible, but asked me to
> > see if I could find out anything. According to him, sites that have
>productive for the last 15 years are now void of welaka. I am
> > wondering if any of my southern brethren have heard of such a person?
>that I think that a foreign aquarist is necessarily involved,
> > but this is very upsetting in any case. As Chris knows, I have been
>kicking around the idea of writing an article on how the range of
> > this fish has changed over the years. Due to intense time pressure I
>haven't really made any headway on this, but the little
> > information I have gathered is alarming. Some of you may gather from my
>"point-counterpoint" dialog with Gene Helfman (I think it's
> > in this issue of A/C, unless Chris decided it was too controversial)
>I am gung-ho about collecting "special concern" species
> > which do not enjoy legal protection. This is not the case at all, as I
>hope I communicated in my rebuttal. P. welaka is one of those
> > fish which is not protected in MS, but is listed as "special concern".
>am almost to the point of asking NANFA to declare an official
> > moratorium on collecting this fish, but I need to get my facts in order
>first. If there is a reckless individual out there, and anybody
> > has any idea who it might be, PLEASE help me in identifying him.
> >
> > Prost,
> >
> > Martin
/"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,