|
-- T r a n s p l a n t i n g ( p l a n t c u l t u r e ) --
click on the question number for the answer |
||
| Q 1. | ||
| Have marine fishes ever been successfully introduced to new areas? |
||
| Q 2. | ||
| Have we successfully introduced any species of fish from the Atlantic to the Pacific coasts of the United States? |
||
| Q 3. | ||
| For many years I have talked of transplanting tarpon from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific, especially to the Acapulco area, to enhance the sports fishing on the west coast. Is this possible? I know other animals have been transplanted. |
||
| Q 4. | ||
| In several issues of Sea Secrets I have noted statements along the line of the following: "Generally it is not advisable to introduce foreign species into an area without a careful study. Some species can seriously upset the natural balance of marine life, causing serious consequences." I note, however, that transplantations are carried out in Russia on a very large scale. According to the publication Kosmos, approximately 1,500 transplantations of aquatic animals were made in the Soviet Union during the years 1929 to 1940. Carp, salmon and herring are among some of the animals that have been transplanted - in many cases, apparently successfully. Would you care to comment? |
||
| Q&A 1. | Have marine fishes ever been successfully introduced to new areas? |
||
| The striped bass, Roccus saxatilis, was introduced some time ago from the east coast of America to the Cal1fornia coast, where it is now established and thriving. In addit1on, thirteen species of fish have been introduced to Bermuda from elsewhere, and some of these have now become well established. Among the introduced forms are snapper, grunts, spadefish, angelfish, flounder, northern kingfish, tautog, and sea bass. Because of Bermuda's geographical isolation it has been found well suited for the experimental introduction of new species of fish. |
|||
| go back to Questions |
|||
| Q&A 2. | Have we successfully introduced any species of fish from the Atlantic to the Pacific coasts of the United States? Miami, Florida |
||
| The shad, Alosa sapidissima, and the striped bass or rockfish, Roccus lineatus, have been successfully transplanted from our Atlantic to Pacific waters. In 1871 the larvae of shad were taken from the Hudson to the Sacramento River and in 1873 the experiment was repeated. Although only 47,000 larvae were transplanted in this manner, these experiments were judged successful. Several years later an additional 609,000 larvae ware liberated in the Sacramento River and over 900,000 larvae in areas to the north. From these assists by biologists the shad has been able to extend itself to southeastern Alaska and can be found in waters near Los Angeles. Success with this clupeid was followed by transplanting young and medium sized serranides, namely the striped bass of New Jersey. These stripers are found from Florida to New Brunswick in the Atlantic, but it was not until after 1879, the year when they were transplanted to San Francisco Bay, that Pacific anglers began to find them in their catch. Less than 500 fish were liberated near the Bay but by the early days of the twentieth century nearly 2,000,000 pounds were being landed annually. |
|||
| go back to Questions |
|||
| Q&A 3. | For many years I have talked of transplanting tarpon from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific, especially to the Acapulco area, to enhance the sports fishing on the west coast. Is this possible? I know other animals have been transplanted. Mexico, D.F. |
||
| According to Babcock (The Tarpon, 1951), tarpon have already spread to the Pacific through the Panama Canal. If these reports are correct, the eventual northward spread of tarpon, at least to Acapulco, seems inevitable. If the tarpon were not already in the Pacific, the wisdom of transplanting must be questioned. The history of man's introduction of animals from one part of the world to another is full of examples which have turned out harmful rather than beneficial. Before a new species is introduced into an area, the biology of the species, with emphasis on its relationships with other species, should be carefully investigated. An assessment of its probable impact on the life already present in the proposed area should be made. The tarpon is not a valuable food fish; conceivably it could be a superior competitor to one or more species which are. Or, being a large carnivore, it could reduce the stock of important, smaller species. At the present time, the inshore fishes of the tropical Eastern Pacific are not being exploited heavily as a food supply. However, as the population of the world continues to increase, the resources of the sea will be utilized more completely. When this necessity arises, mankind would probably suffer because of the introduction of a non-food fish. |
|||
| go back to Questions |
|||
| Q&A 4. | In several issues of Sea Secrets I have noted statements along the line of the following: "Generally it is not advisable to introduce foreign species into an area without a careful study. Some species can seriously upset the natural balance of marine life, causing serious consequences." I note, however, that transplantations are carried out in Russia on a very large scale. According to the publication Kosmos, approximately 1,500 transplantations of aquatic animals were made in the Soviet Union during the years 1929 to 1940. Carp, salmon and herring are among some of the animals that have been transplanted - in many cases, apparently successfully. Would you care to comment? Cristobal, Canal Zone |
||
| The problem of introduction of animals into an area not included in their native range is a very difficult and involved one. For a general discussion of this we suggest you consult a new book on exotic wildlife by George Laycock. Few scientists are completely opposed to introductions, since there are examples of useful stocking of exotic animals. However the general record of introductions is long and includes many results that are detrimental to desirable native species. For example in some places introduced carp may be serving a useful purpose, but in the United States fishermen, both commercial and sport, have nothing good to say about the carp. Some years ago the Agricultural Department introduced into Florida a large tropical toad to serve as an insectivore, this act being done without consultation with other groups. Not only has this toad failed to contribute anything beneficial to man, but it is directly trespassing on his interests. Also, it has had a detrimental effect on the native amphibian fauna. The problem has become sufficiently acute for civic leaders to suggest that a bounty be instituted to eliminate the toad. Unfortunately such a suggestion is not practical and the ecology of South Florida is such that we are stuck with this animal, like it or not. We think the burden of proof lies with one who would introduce such an animal and that such introductions should result only after careful study by qualified scientists. |
|||
| go back to Questions |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Rosenstiel School of Marine & Atmospheric Science Library
University of Miami, FL USA 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, Florida 33149 Phone: 305 421 4060 Fax: 305 421 9306 E-mail: libcirc@rsmas.miami.edu |
 |
go to the top |
|