I guess what I was saying is : is a peacock bass from the orinoco that ends up established in a river somewhere else in the amazon considered invasive. Of course it will be invasive if it establishes itself in florida. I am nkt talking about that
Alligator Gars in coldwater ponds
- Thread starter Chub_by
- Start date
There are several tiers of nonnative species commonly accepted in invasion ecology.
present- species has been sighted not much other evidence
Reproducing- population shows signs of reproduction may or may not be a permanent population
Established- population has persisted for multiple years and major swings in environmental conditions (think 10year record heat or cold for the area floods or droughts)
Invasive- established species that causes harm to the environment, humans, animals, plants, or economy
The other thing we need to discuss is the likelihood of a species moving from its original established range (range expansion) Peacock bass in a power plant cooling pond in Montana are never going to move beyond that pond. Bighead carp in the Mississippi are going to (have) travel to many of the tributaries up and downstream from their introduction point.
Then you have alternate ends for establishment.
Failed- the population was unable to persist (increase in natural predation, extreme weather event, etc wipes out population
Extirpated- human intervention removes the population to the point of failure
As for moving within a country's borders that is complicated and more political than ecological. Most people don't stress about an animal moving from one body of water to the next, but if it didn't get there naturally it really should be considered nonnative. As for invasive see the previous definitions. Now with natives we also have to talk about natural range expansions. These are species that aren't commonly found in an area but have moved there on their own, and keep expanding.
This is an extremely important conversation to have as detractors to our hobby want to say all of our animals are invasive or potentially invasive. We have to be vigilant to keep this from being politicized and call out bad science when we see it. A great example of bad science is here in the USGS database which is usually good. Raphael catfish (Platydoras costatus) - Collection record (usgs.gov) . If you look at their collection record, they say they found one fish and listed it as established in Texas. These aren't self-cloning crawfish it takes 2.
present- species has been sighted not much other evidence
Reproducing- population shows signs of reproduction may or may not be a permanent population
Established- population has persisted for multiple years and major swings in environmental conditions (think 10year record heat or cold for the area floods or droughts)
Invasive- established species that causes harm to the environment, humans, animals, plants, or economy
The other thing we need to discuss is the likelihood of a species moving from its original established range (range expansion) Peacock bass in a power plant cooling pond in Montana are never going to move beyond that pond. Bighead carp in the Mississippi are going to (have) travel to many of the tributaries up and downstream from their introduction point.
Then you have alternate ends for establishment.
Failed- the population was unable to persist (increase in natural predation, extreme weather event, etc wipes out population
Extirpated- human intervention removes the population to the point of failure
As for moving within a country's borders that is complicated and more political than ecological. Most people don't stress about an animal moving from one body of water to the next, but if it didn't get there naturally it really should be considered nonnative. As for invasive see the previous definitions. Now with natives we also have to talk about natural range expansions. These are species that aren't commonly found in an area but have moved there on their own, and keep expanding.
This is an extremely important conversation to have as detractors to our hobby want to say all of our animals are invasive or potentially invasive. We have to be vigilant to keep this from being politicized and call out bad science when we see it. A great example of bad science is here in the USGS database which is usually good. Raphael catfish (Platydoras costatus) - Collection record (usgs.gov) . If you look at their collection record, they say they found one fish and listed it as established in Texas. These aren't self-cloning crawfish it takes 2.
If there is a guy in the uk keeping gars outside during winter then a) I am EXTREMELY surprised, b) he should not be mentioning it. They will simply add them to the list of fish we cannot keep.
Chinese hi fin do not reproduce explosively and we are no longer allowed to keep them. In the last ten years the list has grown significantly and we dont want any reason to add to it. There is already a large list of probables to add.
Chinese hi fin do not reproduce explosively and we are no longer allowed to keep them. In the last ten years the list has grown significantly and we dont want any reason to add to it. There is already a large list of probables to add.
Yeah, we need a progress report. Get out there with an ice auger and an underwater camera and see what's what.
Northern variants are commonly found in WI in rivers, and the Great Lakes where temps drop into the minus 0 range.
If you want one for outside, you need to find a northern variant.
Florida, Mexican, or Cuban gars have not evolved tolerate that type cold.
If you want one for outside, you need to find a northern variant.
Florida, Mexican, or Cuban gars have not evolved tolerate that type cold.
There are certainly other species of gar found that far north, and even further...but I am pretty sure there are no variants of the Alligator Gar species found anywhere near there; certainly not in recent times. The furthest north that I can find mentioned anywhere is a couple of references that state they "may" have once extended north as far as Iowa, and west as far as Kansas.
Longnose Gar would be easily capable of surviving a Colorado winter.
They’ve been restocking gators in Illinois for a number of yrs now and keeping tabs on them. Prob the furthest north for recent times.
That's great...but I'm now bored and officially done pulling up a map of the US over and over to find out where all these assorted states actually are...
It seems that Illinois drains north into the Great Lakes? Is that correct? Some sources seem to indicate it's connected to the Great Lakes...maybe by man-made canals? Or is the area in which the re-stocking is being done part of a watershed that drains south? Apparently one of the sites is in the Illinois River which naturally drains into the Mississippi; another is a complete landlocked lake; not sure about the other sites.
Last edited:
Sorry for being so vague… geography is boring i agree, had to check the ole google map myself lol… Illinois does touch the great lakes (Lake Michigan)… But it seems they are targeting waters that flow south to the mississippi. Not as exciting as stocking the northern portion of the state. Goes back further than i thought tho since 2010. Hopefully they continue to push north with the program.That's great...but I'm now bored and officially done pulling up a map of the US over and over to find out where all these assorted states actually are...
It seems that Illinois drains north into the Great Lakes? Is that correct? Some sources seem to indicate it's connected to the Great Lakes...maybe by man-made canals? Or is the area in which the re-stocking is being done part of a watershed that drains south? Apparently one of the sites is in the Illinois River which naturally drains into the Mississippi; another is a complete landlocked lake; not sure about the other sites.
