Well most of those are snakeheads are they not? And the rest tilapia? May not be our cup of tea but certainly not the same level as shooting gar or Buffalo. One could argue they were doing the native system a favor?
They're actually mostly Clown Knifefish, not snakehead. Indeed they're non-native and harmful, but the visceral reaction we have when we see it is due to the wanton waste that undoubtedly resulted from that pile of fish. It's just so unsportsman-like and disrespectful of the fish.
Also, some yay-whos with bows aren't going to eliminate a non-native species infestation.
Ah I see, they looked snakeheadish but definitely different. Yeah I get it, I'm not trying to be apologetic for the bowfishers, just pointing out that it isn't quite the same. I think bow fishing for natives needs to be strictly regulated or made illegal all together depending on the species, while bow fishing for invasives should be allowed without limits. But of course nobody's asking me hahaha
I think there is room for diversity of opinions (except for the people wanting to wantonly waste natives, they can take a long hike on the short pier). I'd personally be totally ok with people bowfishing native fish (including gamefish) with reasonable harvest limits IF the fish are being eaten, not wasted or turned into fertilizer (which is often euphemism just rotting in a pile).
With nonnative species I'm a bit more squishy, it definitely bothes me less when they are being taken out. Ethically I still take an issue with wanton waste, even with invasive species. But I'm definitely bothered by it to a lower degree. That said, I wouldn't be upset about the destruction of a patch of buckthorn so maybe I'm a hypocrite. Though I'd rather see that buckthorn removed and have that patch of land actively managed to restore native oak savanna, rather than just ripping it out and moving on.
So if bowfishers wanted to remove invasive species AND actively help restore native species (including native "rough" fish) I'd probably have a very different impression of this image. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the typical case
Well said buddy, that's pretty much exactly how I see it too. I have gotten our local bow fishers to leave the buffs alone for the most part, slow process.
I think "invasive species" needs more context, too. If most species in a system aren't native, and a new non-native species doesn't pose any new threat to the native populations, maybe something like this can't be justified as invasive species removal.
I'm not upset about this. I understand why some people might be, but this is an invasive species with no limits and I believe Florida allows them to be dumped by law. If bowfishers wish to shoot a whole bunch of fish, this is where they should go. This kind of behavior should be encouraged, rather than the beneficial native fish wastage.
I mostly agree with Corey, but here's a little different perspective.
Not all non-native fish are invasive species. Some states, including Florida and Arizona, make a distinction between the two. Invasive species are often defined as being non-native AND causing unacceptable harm to native species, the environment, economic interests, and/or recreational interests. And that is usually designated on a statewide level. Some non-native species are considered desirable, or some just not causing an imminent threat, and thus should not be treated the same as invasive species by anglers and biologists.
The level of wanton waste in this photo still disgusts me, but generally I don't mind anglers (and bowfishers) removing invasive species. The knifefish is not only a non-native species, it is an invasive species in Florida. As much as I'd love to catch one some day, removal of invasive species is generally okay in my book (with caveats, see below).
Having said that, I don't think a single massive removal like this does much to benefit native species or the environment. If those fish were so numerous that bowfishers could kill this many in one outing, one outing isn't gonna fix the problem. It would take repeated and focused efforts to really control that population, otherwise the population will just rebound. Repeated efforts at this level should be coordinated with the local biologist who can direct them to locations where they would do the most good. Removing occasionally encountered individuals of an invasive species isn't going to make a difference either. If you are going to eat it and its legal, go ahead and take it. If you aren't going to eat it but it just makes you feel better, sure, go ahead and remove it, but don't kid yourself that you are doing good things for the environment. That level of individual removal isn't gonna make a difference biologically. In some cases though, it might be illegal to release an invasive species that you catch. In that case, definitely follow the law and kill it.
The take home message is that we should take care to not confuse non-native with invasive. Non-native specise don't warrant the same treatment as invasive species. And know the regulations.
Powered
Comments
Rough Stuff
Thu, 04/22/2021 - 08:05
Permalink
Ignorance is Bliss
If only they spent their efforts, time, and money on something productive.
Where is the fish?
https://youtu.be/1Uvt83YWWWY
dlk243
Wed, 05/05/2021 - 00:21
Permalink
Well most of those are
Well most of those are snakeheads are they not? And the rest tilapia? May not be our cup of tea but certainly not the same level as shooting gar or Buffalo. One could argue they were doing the native system a favor?
Graceclaw
Wed, 05/05/2021 - 10:24
Permalink
Wanton
They're actually mostly Clown Knifefish, not snakehead. Indeed they're non-native and harmful, but the visceral reaction we have when we see it is due to the wanton waste that undoubtedly resulted from that pile of fish. It's just so unsportsman-like and disrespectful of the fish.
Also, some yay-whos with bows aren't going to eliminate a non-native species infestation.
dlk243
Thu, 05/06/2021 - 19:08
Permalink
Ah I see, they looked
dlk243
Thu, 05/06/2021 - 19:08
Permalink
Ah I see, they looked
Ah I see, they looked snakeheadish but definitely different. Yeah I get it, I'm not trying to be apologetic for the bowfishers, just pointing out that it isn't quite the same. I think bow fishing for natives needs to be strictly regulated or made illegal all together depending on the species, while bow fishing for invasives should be allowed without limits. But of course nobody's asking me hahaha
TonyS
Fri, 05/07/2021 - 08:32
Permalink
Shades of truth
I think there is room for diversity of opinions (except for the people wanting to wantonly waste natives, they can take a long hike on the short pier). I'd personally be totally ok with people bowfishing native fish (including gamefish) with reasonable harvest limits IF the fish are being eaten, not wasted or turned into fertilizer (which is often euphemism just rotting in a pile).
With nonnative species I'm a bit more squishy, it definitely bothes me less when they are being taken out. Ethically I still take an issue with wanton waste, even with invasive species. But I'm definitely bothered by it to a lower degree. That said, I wouldn't be upset about the destruction of a patch of buckthorn so maybe I'm a hypocrite. Though I'd rather see that buckthorn removed and have that patch of land actively managed to restore native oak savanna, rather than just ripping it out and moving on.
So if bowfishers wanted to remove invasive species AND actively help restore native species (including native "rough" fish) I'd probably have a very different impression of this image. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the typical case
FP4LifesDad
Sat, 05/08/2021 - 11:36
Permalink
Well said buddy, that's
Well said buddy, that's pretty much exactly how I see it too. I have gotten our local bow fishers to leave the buffs alone for the most part, slow process.
dlk243
Thu, 05/06/2021 - 19:09
Permalink
They look like a fun fish to
They look like a fun fish to tie into!
SomewhereDownstream
Wed, 05/12/2021 - 11:17
Permalink
Invasive species remove
I think "invasive species" needs more context, too. If most species in a system aren't native, and a new non-native species doesn't pose any new threat to the native populations, maybe something like this can't be justified as invasive species removal.
SomewhereDownstream
Corey
Tue, 03/29/2022 - 15:37
Permalink
Non-natives
I'm not upset about this. I understand why some people might be, but this is an invasive species with no limits and I believe Florida allows them to be dumped by law. If bowfishers wish to shoot a whole bunch of fish, this is where they should go. This kind of behavior should be encouraged, rather than the beneficial native fish wastage.
Pinefish123
Wed, 03/30/2022 - 16:38
Permalink
Not all non-natives are invasive
I mostly agree with Corey, but here's a little different perspective.
Not all non-native fish are invasive species. Some states, including Florida and Arizona, make a distinction between the two. Invasive species are often defined as being non-native AND causing unacceptable harm to native species, the environment, economic interests, and/or recreational interests. And that is usually designated on a statewide level. Some non-native species are considered desirable, or some just not causing an imminent threat, and thus should not be treated the same as invasive species by anglers and biologists.
The level of wanton waste in this photo still disgusts me, but generally I don't mind anglers (and bowfishers) removing invasive species. The knifefish is not only a non-native species, it is an invasive species in Florida. As much as I'd love to catch one some day, removal of invasive species is generally okay in my book (with caveats, see below).
Having said that, I don't think a single massive removal like this does much to benefit native species or the environment. If those fish were so numerous that bowfishers could kill this many in one outing, one outing isn't gonna fix the problem. It would take repeated and focused efforts to really control that population, otherwise the population will just rebound. Repeated efforts at this level should be coordinated with the local biologist who can direct them to locations where they would do the most good. Removing occasionally encountered individuals of an invasive species isn't going to make a difference either. If you are going to eat it and its legal, go ahead and take it. If you aren't going to eat it but it just makes you feel better, sure, go ahead and remove it, but don't kid yourself that you are doing good things for the environment. That level of individual removal isn't gonna make a difference biologically. In some cases though, it might be illegal to release an invasive species that you catch. In that case, definitely follow the law and kill it.
The take home message is that we should take care to not confuse non-native with invasive. Non-native specise don't warrant the same treatment as invasive species. And know the regulations.