Flyfish@ list members:
I forward the following message from the fishfolk list. The
author/compiler Gene Buck describes incidents of folks maliciously
stocking exotic fish and, if known, the outcome. If you tend to react
negatively to private individuals "playing God", then you might find some
of the following quite disturbing. Be prepared.
Erik Poole epoole@sfu.ca
Burnaby, BC
Malicious introductions
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:21:02 -0500
From: Gene Buck
Subject: Malicious introductions - summary - part 1 of 2
Here is a collection of responses that were sent to me after my Nov. 6, 1997,
query about malicious introductions of aquatic species, with no judgement on
my part as to whether any of the examples cited would actually constitute a
"malicious" act. I have separated them into "referrals and citations" and
examples" and have tried to not duplicate those responses already posted to
the list. My apologies for any inadvertent duplication. I have also exercised
some limited editing to help maintain the anonymity of respondents.
Gene Buck, gbuck@crs.loc.gov
REFERRALS AND CITATIONS:
1) Malicious introductions has been a subject of some debate among invasion
biologists. The "king" of all such knowledge is Dr. Jim Carlton, at the
Smithsonian and Williams College.
There are also some invasive species listservs. One list is from the
California Exotic Pest Plant Council. The address is "exotic-plants@igc.org"
which may be subscribed to by sending the following message to
majordomo@igc.org: "subscribe exotic-plants"
2) I highly recommend the following book which reviews many examples, plus
gives you the full bibliography to fish introductions (legal and illegal ones):
Lever, Christopher. 1997. Naturalized fishes of the world. Academic
Press. London. ISBN:0-12-444745-7
3) If you have not been in contact with Leo Nico at the Florida and Caribbean
Science Center, USGS, Gainesville, Florida, you should do so.
As you are probably aware, his agency is charged with cataloguing exotic
fish introductions. Leo is the senior biologist in charge of fish
introductions.
They have an enormous database of literature documenting exotic fish
releases. His address is "Leo_Nico@usgs.gov"
4) Spencer, C. N, B. R. McClelland, and J. A. Stanford. 1991. Shrimp
stocking, salmon collapse, and eagle displacement. BioScience. 42: 14-21.
EXAMPLES:
1) I understand there have been several sabotages (in Scandinavia) to Salmo
spp. rearing sea-farms where cages were destroyed and fish escaped to the
wild. Perhaps, those escapees could be considered as non-native as they are
the product of artificial selection/genetic manipulation.
2) This is from memory, so there may be some errors - On a small island
(Lasqueti Island) between Vancouver Island and the mainland of British
Columbia, there are a couple of small lakes. These lakes harbored threespine
stickleback which had separated into a pelagic and benthic populations,
believed to be distinct species, although not named until more work was done
on their taxonomy. Since there was a proposal put through to make these
lakes into ecological reserves, the people nearby introduced brown bullhead (a
catfish) into one of the lakes to extirpate the sticklebacks. Their scheme
worked. Dr. Don McPhail should be able to give
you more information and correct the above.
In the Champion Lakes provincial park, just north of Trail, B.C. and near
the US-Canada boundary, an expensive program to eradicate long-nosed
suckers and redside shiners was undertaken about 12 years ago. This was
successful, and rainbow trout were re-introduced. The system was barren
before access was developed into the lake, and rainbow and cutthroat trout
were officially introduced into the lakes. The shiners and suckers were put in
by people who thought that they would improve the size of the cutthroat. In
fact, they exterminated them! Anyway, shortly after the sports fish were
re-introduced, some party re-introduced the suckers and shiners, apparently
solely to make the effort at eradication futile. Large posters had been put up
to explain the rationale and why the coarse fish had proven to have a totally
negative effect on the sports fishing. The other assumption is that the
malicious introduction was done to damage the sports fishing potential. Since
the culprits were not caught or identified, so far as I know, your guess is as
good as mine. But, it was not done with the idea of improving the fishing,
since the experience had shown that to be a disaster.
3) You know, both the Nazis in the early days of WWII and the Russians
during the height of the Cold War claimed that the US was seeding their fields
with Colorado potato beetles. I've never seen an investigation of the matter.
Has there been one?
There have certainly been liberations of monkeys by animal rights
advocates, including in places where monkey might survive in the wild. Not
exactly what you are seeking, but tangential.
Finally, I am fairly certain that some of the piranhas liberated in Florida
are
liberated with evil intent, rather than just to get rid of them. A fair number
of
piranhas are liberated. Walt Courtenay at Florida Atlantic University could
give you stats on them.
4) As you probably know many of the freshwater angling sport species have
been widely introduced to promote fishing, most of the time legally,
sometimes illegally. One clear example that comes to mind:
In the early 1980's two German anglers brought fertilized eggs and
juveniles European catfish (Silurus glanis) to the Ebro river in Spain, far away
from the natural habitat of this east european silurid, where it can reach
weights of 500 lb. The intent of these fishermen was to produce a new sport
fishery, since in the part of the Ebro river where they were introduced there
was a great abundance of carp (introduced by Romans), a natural prey of
Silurus glanis. Now this is a very abundant species in the lower Ebro, with
fish of more than 100 lb being caught, and competes with other predators
such as zander, largemouth bass, pike, and perch (all exotic).
5) In many years of working with conservation of desert fishes, there have
been several instances where largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides)
showed up very suspiciously in refuges built for the protection of Owens
pupfish (Cyprinodon radiosus). The refuge areas are too small to support
sportfish populations, so I can only assume that the introductions were made
with malicious intent. There are those individuals in the local community who
resent the use of public funds for the protection of nongame species, and it is
my guess that this was the underlying motivation for the introductions. Neutral
parties have reported this type of discussion in local bars. Such a matter is
always subject to some speculation, inasmuch as the perpetrators of such
things are not likely to make it known publicly.
6) We have one clear example of such a malicious introduction down here in
Australia. We have a dry internal drainage (Lake Eyre system) with uniquely
adapted native species. On the edge of this drainage is a large coal mine,
and associated town, servicing a power plant elsewhere. One of the company
employees was fired. In spite, he transferred exotic, duly hated European
carp into a large retention dam near the town. The dam is the sole aquatic
playground for this desert community and had been "adopted" by everyone
including the local primary school to beautify, etc.
As with most such events, our compliance officers failed to find sufficient
evidence to take the matter to court ($60K fine applies). We've tried poisoning
the system twice to no avail, so eventually these fish will gain access to the
Cooper Creek system.
7) Here is a segment from a book chapter that Peter Moyle and Hiram Li just
finished (2nd edition): "A better understanding of predator-prey relationships
has lead to much less frequent use of predator and forage introductions as a
management tool by fisheries biologists. Unfortunately, segments of the
angling public are not as well informed. The unauthorized introductions of sport
and forage fishes is a major headache of managers in many areas today and
is a legacy of the enthusiastic use of this tool by managers in the past. In
Montana alone over 200 illegal fish introductions have been recorded in recent
years (Rahel 1997). In California, anglers have tried to establish northern
pike
in streams in reservoirs despite the danger it poses to native salmon fisheries
and the high costs of eradicating established pike populations. 'Johnny
Appleseed' introductions of percids and centrarchids to reservoirs in Oregon
are occurring with alarming frequency."
Smallmouth bass were illegally introduced to the Umpqua River, Oregon
where it threatens the Umpqua chub, a federally listed species, and
endangers coho salmon and cutthroat trout, two species at risk.
Lake trout were illegally introduced into Yellowstone Lake. The
consequences of which are not yet known.
Li, H.W. and P.B. Moyle. In Press. Management of introduced fishes,
Chapter 12, In C. Kohler and W. Hubert. In Press. Inland Fisheries
Management in North America (2nd edition). American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda MD.
Rahel, F. J. 1997. From Johnny Appleseed to Dr. Frankenstein: changing
values and the legacy of fisheries management. Fisheries 22(8): 8-9.
8) The following incident may fall into the category of "thoughtless
introductions where aquarium fish/plants/organisms may have been dumped",
but given the notoriety of the species, it is difficult for me to believe that
there
was not at least a subconscious maliciousness about the introduction.
On 30 June 1992, a piranha (Pygocentrus nattereri) was captured by an
angler in Lake Wilson, a reservoir of central Oahu, Hawai`i. The reservoir is a
popular recreational fishing area and many people take their children there. A
second, dead, piranha was found on moat in the Honolulu Zoo on 7 July 1992,
and was believed by Zoo employees to have been released into the moat.
When the moat was drained on 15 July 1992, a third, live, piranha was found.
No more were found in open waters of Oahu until 21 February 1993, when
another angler caught a second specimen in Lake Wilson. None have been
found since, despite intensive searches. But an effort to find illegally
imported
piranhas on Oahu resulted in the seizing of 34 more from aquaria; Hawai`i
State law explicitly prohibits the importation of piranhas.
At about the time of the first capture, in early June 1992, police
uncovered
an illegal animal smuggling operation that in part specialized in bringing in
noxious organisms to Hawai`i, including gars, electric eels, and scorpions (but
no piranhas were found during the arrests). There is no evidence to suggest
that this operation was in itself responsible for the released piranhas. The
person who released the fish was never identified.
Given the popular reputation of piranhas, it is difficult for me to believe
that
the person who released the fish into the reservoir thought that they were
benign. I have no evidence that the releases were consciously malicious, but
they were certainly done with ill intent. Fortunately, no more were captured
and there is no evidence that the fish reproduced. But while the 37 piranhas
captured or confiscated were retained at the Waikiki Aquarium they began
spawning in a tank open to ambient light and temperatures, indicating that
reproduction in natural waters of Hawai`i was entirely possible.
Details of this series of events can be found in newspaper articles in the
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, 13 June 1992, 3 July, 4 July, 7 July, 16 July, 25 July,
&
31 July. The capture of the second piranha in Lake Wilson is mentioned in a
Hawaii Fishing News article in April 1993, vol. 18, no. 3. Other information
about the first specimen can be found in: R. L. Radtke. 1995. Forensic
biological pursuits of exotic fish origins: piranha in Hawai. Environmental
Biology of Fishes, vol. 43, pages 393-399.
9) I don't know of any documented cases, but there is some speculation
through various rumors that a person named the "unapiker" plans to
re-introduced pike into Lake Davis, Ca. Last month Ca. Fish and Game
employees rotenoned the lake to get rid of the pike. Many locals were very
upset about the poisoning of their water supply. It is speculated that some
local has some pike sitting in bathtub ready to be introduced at any time.
10) E-mail Dr. John R. Moring or call the ME Inland Dept. of Wildlife and
Fisheries. I recall that white perch were introduced into Moosehead lake as
part of a conflict with the State's Fisheries department. In fact, the
perpetrator
deliberately dumped the fish in right in front of the department's office on the
lake. Dr. Moring will have more details. Northern pike were also illegally
introduced in the Belgrade Lakes of Maine. Unfortunately, no one knows who
did it... so we don't know if the introduction was malicious. I might have the
details of the perch introduction slightly askew, but the general idea is
correct.
11) one example of a malicious introduction would be the periodic release of
piranhas in water bodies in Florida.
12) I believe that many introductions that were intended to enhance sport or
commercial fisheries have also been illegal and could be considered malicious
in that they have impacted native fishes. I doubt that many such introductions
are well documented in the literature but they tend to be common knowledge
among fishery professionals in state fish and game agencies. While I was a
graduate student, an individual transported or attempted to transport bluegill
(Lepomis macrochirus) from Pelican Lake in Utah (where they were also
introduced at some point in the past) to Kenney Reservoir, on the White River
in Colorado. While this was not really a transfer between drainage basins,
Pelican Lake is a more or less closed system and the White River is within
the range of at least one endangered Colorado River cyprinid (Colorado River
squawfish - Pytchocheilus lucius). I am not sure if this introduction
succeeded but I do believe the responsible individual was prosecuted under
the Lacey Act. I think that such introductions by "well-meaning" sportsman
looking to increase the range of their favorite species have been common in
the western US and continue to be a threat to native species. I would think
that court records of fish and wildlife cases might be of value.
13) Mink were released from a fur farm some time ago in the UK, possibly
during the 80s. They have become a serious pest of waterfowl. I do not know
the details, but you may be able to get information from wildlife persons there.
14) As you know, exotic species are a particularly nasty problem in Florida,
but most of them are the result of carelessness or stupidity. There are some
marginal cases like Melaleuca that was intentionally introduced to dry out the
Everglades to make the swampland developable, but whether one can
confound maliciousness and greed is another question.
15) See the intro of Hydrilla into bass fishing lakes in the south. Bass
fishermen think its great (as catch rates and sizes go up for a few years) then
the stuff takes over and chokes the lake/impoundment and we have to resort
to spraying, etc. Contact the LA Dept of Wildlife and Fisheries for info on
this
stuff. "LDWF@wlf.state.la.us" is their email address.
16) There are very tight restrictions against exotic fishes in Alaska. Truth
be
known, the legal aspects have little to do with preventing successful
introductions by well-intended but mis-guided anglers, etc. What keeps these
fish from taking hold is our severe winters. They can't make it through their
first one, even if they do breed successfully; introduced fish and any of their
progeny are doomed when their first winter arrives. However, climate warming
may change this. Individuals are studying the effects that warming trends
may have on the success of resident fish in extending their ranges within
Alaska, and on the success of non-resident species invading Alaska, whether
by natural or human-supported means.
So, to your question. I'm having a hard time understanding what you are
after. Probably because I don't know the definition of a malicious
introduction.
To destroy an ecosystem? To ruin someone's fishing hole? Even more
important why is this important to know? From a
resource/biodiversity/conservation standpoint, is it not enough to know that a
species was or was not introduced successfully? Why is motive important?
People convicted of illegal introductions (has anyone ever been?) would not be
convicted for their motive, rather for their action.
17) We have had several suspected malicious introductions of nonnative
fishes into waters of Montana. Walleye have been found in several reservoirs
where not officially stocked. Also we have found brook trout moved into upper
reaches or streams or mountain lakes, most likely by anglers who preferred to
fish for brook trout. In one case, we had placed a fish migration barrier on a
stream to prevent re-invasion by brook trout in an upper portion of the stream
where we removed brook trout to protect a native westslope cutthroat trout
population. We are extremely concerned about illegal (malicious)
introductions of nonnative fishes which may thwart efforts at conservation and
restoration of native species. Mike Young from Wyoming (email:
/S=M.YOUNG/OU1=R02F06A@mhs-fswa.attmail.com) has similar stories for
some areas where native trout were restored in Wyoming.
18) It is my understanding that northern pike and white bass were both
illegally, but intentionally, introduced to and transported around California by
private party anglers. White bass were also introduced on a limited basis to
one dead-end watershed with peculiar water quality problems near Santa
Barbara by the Department. Both required extensive multimillion dollar
rotenone-based eradication programs in California. For more detailed
information contact Senior Biologist Supervisor Nick Villa who has had
experience with both eradication programs at 916-358-2943, or their
Conservation Education Office at 916-653-7664.
19) If you contact the Montana Dept of Fish Wildlife and Parks in Kalispell,
Montana (see if Laney Hanzel is still there) he may have a story to tell you
about an individual that keeps a population of his favorite fish in a private
pond.
Although I can't prove anything, this walleye fan has been suspected of
planting fish in open defiance of state regulations. I'm not sure if open
defiance counts as a malicious introduction.
20) As someone once wrote, anglers are the original "Johnny
Pumpkinseeds". I would hazard a guess that every state fisheries department
would have a story of some angler or group "improving" waters by
unauthorized "stockings". But I believe I have seen more written references of
this in the Pacific Northwest, particularly anglers stocking largemouth bass in
waters being professionally managed for a cold water fishery. Not surprising,
since it wasn't that long ago that many states dumped various species into
lakes and ponds, just to see what might happen, with little thought given to
impact on native species or the survivability of the species due to water
temps, pH, etc.
21) I spent several years in the Peace Corps in Palau, a group of islands in
Micronesia. I was told by some older Palauans that during WWII the
Japanese introduced saltwater crocodiles collected in Indonesia or Malaysia
into the mangrove swamps on Peleliu Island in the southern part of the island
chain to discourage the Allies from landing troops on the islands. I am not
sure whether the story was true or not but the crocs were a definite problem
while I was there.
22) I can't remember the exact facts, but there were some specific threats of
malicious introductions in the Galapagos last year (1996 or 1995). The locals
wanted to protest against the invasion pleasure/tourists boats run under
license by mainland operators. I think it concerned terrestrial organisms but
am not sure. TRAFFIC would know.
23) I can pass along an anecdote, for what it's worth. An individual, of Tol
Island, in Chuuk Lagoon, E. Caroline Islands, Micronesia, told me he saw
person from the next island, Polle, over come to his island and release Bufo
marianus (spelling?), the marine toad, on Tol, out of some kind of spite. This
introduction isn't the only malicious one I have ever heard of, anecdotally---it
was some kind of folklore on the beach in Hawaii in the 70's that mosquitoes
originally were brought to Hawaii by a captain who was angry at the chief, and
went (to Peru?), to bring a bucketful of wigglers to the islands.
The first anecdote is more testable and more believable.
24) We had a borderline case, too. People introduced northern pike into a
lake, Summit Lake, north of Prince George, BC (almost in the geographic
centre of the province) on the Crooked River, presumably to improve fishing,
but rumor suggested that the secondary aim was to undermine the Fisheries
Branch and Conservation Officer service. It cost about $75,000 U.S. to do test
nettings throughout the system for a year to determine that they had not
become established. Summit Lake was on the fur trade route in B.C., as it is
an easy portage into the Fraser River system. The Fraser supports a huge
salmon fishery (one of the points of contention in the U.S. - Canada salmon
disagreement). Well, northern pike carry the parasite Trienophorous crassus
(I have probably miss-spelled that, and my reference is packed), which forms
ribbon-like encysted forms in the flesh of fish. These are not very appealing
in
a commercial species, although to people they are not a problem (when
cooked!). However, the economic impact could have been in the tens of
millions per year if the fish and its parasites crossed over the continental
divide. The country there is flat, and many streams have shared headwater
wetlands, so the possibility was very real.
25) I cannot think of any instance where an introduction of an exotic fish was
deemed a terrorist act. These have always been considered a result of an
accident or ignorance. Seldom, however, have exotics ever proved beneficial
to the receiving ecosystem. I suggest that you contact the Introduced Fishes
Section of the American Fisheries Society (http://www.afsifs.vt.edu/); these
folks are the technical experts. If you wish to make an inquiry at the
executive level, contact the AFS itself
(http://www.esd.ornl.gov/societies/AFS). The AFS Executive Director is Paul
Brouha and he would probably refer you to the Section people anyway.
.........end of summary........