Are dwarf snakeheads legal to keep?

[Veneer]

Ecological stupidity I cannot find either amusing or absurd. :rant:

Neither, however, should misinformation and false generalization be condoned. The negative ecological potential of Channid introduction, while truly newsworthy, should have been conveyed in a scientifically accurate manner. An examination of the media's snakehead claims will be forthcoming.

 

[SnowHeart]

The best (and, personally, only) argument I've heard against the transport and ownership bans was the variety of snakeheads and that many species can't survive in North American waters. :huh: For myself, while I do have certain sympathies to this argument and while I think it's sad a single species might besmirch the reputation of an entire genus, I would much rather the government be safe than sorry. Perhaps as people educate the government as to the "non-invasive" species (a claim I find mildly dubious but certainly feasible and I'm willing to be educated on), those same people can also educate the would-be owners about responsible ownership and the NECESSITY of finding an alternative home or euthenasia upon becoming tired of or no longer capable of caring for a snakehead.

:read: Having looked at pictures of the various species and doing some limited research on them, I can understand why people find them fascinating and even beautiful (in the way a pleco is "beautiful). I also think the advocates of snakeheads, however, while trying to advocate for a more moderated version of the bans need to acknowledge the ecological damage that has been done. Unfortunately, I usually don't see an acknowledgement of that damage and that makes me much less receptive to the anti-ban arguments (particularly as a former resident of the MD/DC area).

Peace,
~Snowy

 

[RTR]

There are no facts to support a "scientifically accurate manner" on introduction of a new and voracious predatory species into the Potomac basin. The fact remains that the fish are well established now in that watershed, and monitoring alone is going to be an ongoing drain on the involved state's DNRs. The final effects on sport fishing (a big income and public awareness source for DNRs) only time will tell, but the bass fishermen are very unhappy already. The is nothing positive about such, and trying to adopt a cool reserved attitude and criticizing the media hoopla rather than the fact of the introductions (multiple, not just the one at the shopping center) toward the situation is offensive to me and I'm confindent it is equally so to others in this area. This is exactly the sort of situation that can easily get our hobby so regulated that it is effectly banned. Try analysing that instead.

 

[hobie237]

The fact of the matter is that some idiot released a fish that didnt belong into waters it shouldnt be in. The next fact is that this newly introduced species is causing lots of problems in those waters, just like the Asian carp (?) that are jumping out of the Mississippi river everytime a boat goes by, and sometimes even knocking people off boats, and causing some deaths, and damage to boats. While I think a responsible owner should be able to keep them, how do we determine the good from the bad owners? We cant, so when something like this happens, it looks bad on everybody, and causes problems for everybody. But if stupidity leading to ecological damage can be prevented by banning a certain species or even genus, it's not always a bad thing...

 

[TheMightyQueenPixie]

We (aquarists) needed the media to go nuts on this... The word needed to get out about how stupid and dangerous it is to release non-indigenous species...RTR is right, if you think it is bad now, you aint seen nothing... It is already difficult and costly to import fish into the US, wait and see how impossible it is going to be if people still carelessly discard unwanted non indgienous species...

 

[hobie237]

We (aquarists) needed the media to go nuts on this... The word needed to get out about how stupid and dangerous it is to release non-indigenous species...RTR is right, if you think it is bad now, you aint seen nothing... It is already difficult and costly to import fish into the US, wait and see how impossible it is going to be if people still carelessly discard unwanted non indgienous species...

And that'll be miserable. Coming from the car world, I can say how miserable it is to try to get something into the country that isnt wanted... European model cars cost thousands to get through and tagged, and you have to go through mountains of paperwork in order to get there. Not something we want to happen in the fish world. Imagine only being able to buy fish native to the US. Or only fish native to your region. That have to be turned in if you move to a region where they are not a native species.

This would truely be a disaster, and it isnt something that I or anyone else here wants to see happen.

 

[FreddytheFish]

Wow...I didn't think I'd get that many responses...

I live in Ohio.

 

[Marn]

I can see why there is a ban on them.. i had one and talk about viscious and will eat anything in it's path.. even way bigger then it is .. it killed off everything in the tank.. and it was bought as a cute lil Eel type fish about 4 inches long .. but soon grew into a eating and killing machine.. there jaws are unreall .. they pop out like a sharks mouth ..and rows upon rows of teeth.. i wouldnt want to have these in lakes .. they take chuncks out of the fish in the whole shape of there mouths ..right through.. not just little nibbles.. and mine was almost 2 feet long ..
I wouldnt want them around..

Marn

 

[Veneer]

There are no facts to support a "scientifically accurate manner" on introduction of a new and voracious predatory species into the Potomac basin. The fact remains that the fish are well established now in that watershed, and monitoring alone is going to be an ongoing drain on the involved state's DNRs. The final effects on sport fishing (a big income and public awareness source for DNRs) only time will tell, but the bass fishermen are very unhappy already.

You have misunderstood me. I do not claim to possess "facts supporting a 'scientifically accurate manner' on introduction" because these would be nonexistant. My wish to clarify misconceptions signifies neither ignorance of the dire consequences of exotic invasion nor the slightest degree of support for such introductions.

The is nothing positive about such, and trying to adopt a cool reserved attitude and criticizing the media hoopla rather than the fact of the introductions (multiple, not just the one at the shopping center) toward the situation is offensive to me and I'm confindent it is equally so to others in this area. This is exactly the sort of situation that can easily get our hobby so regulated that it is effectly banned. Try analysing that instead.

As a resident of Fairfax County, I, too, would find this offensive.

 

[FreddytheFish]

I like debates, but no one really answered my question...