Slashdot Mirror


How One Man Changed the Ecology of the Great Lakes With Salmon

An anonymous reader writes During the sixties the Great Lakes were facing an ecological disaster due to invasive species and over fishing. Biologist Howard Tanner's solution to the problem was to bring in another non-native species, the Pacific salmon. Fishing boomed for many years but with the recent salmon crash in Lake Huron many wonder if the salmon were a band-aid on a ecological wound that's too big to fix. From the article: "Tanner's goal wasn't to just alter the species composition of the lakes; he wanted to change the public's relationship with the lakes themselves. Beyond pier fishing for perch and smallmouth bass, fishing in the lakes primarily had been the domain of relatively few commercial fishing crews using big boats and nets to harvest lake trout, perch, whitefish and chubs for restaurants and stores. But because these commercially fished native species had been so destroyed by overfishing and the lamprey and alewife infestations, Tanner inherited something of a blank slate — almost like a freshly filled reservoir in the West. He had little interest in trying to repaint the same old picture, but wanted instead to turn the waters over to large numbers of sportsmen who fished as much for thrill as fillet."

118 comments

  1. They should try Sharks with lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because seriously, everything is better with lasers.

    Everything

    1. Re: They should try Sharks with lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And bacon

  2. Fear the Asian carp by larry_larry · · Score: 2

    Let's hope the Asian carp doesn't take hold in Lake Huron.

    1. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Its all fun and games until you take one of those to the face.

    2. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      When it does, lay the blame squarely on the City of Chicago. Electric barriers are not going to keep them out.

    3. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know you're going to up to your gills with people carping on about racism -- some out of ignorance, and some will do it just for the halibut.

    4. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The answer to invasive species like Asian carp is to introduce seals into the Great Lakes. Of course, you will need some polar bears to keep the seals in check.

    5. Re:Fear the Asian carp by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Informative

      This... anonymous or not, deserves upward moderation. The non-natural Chicago canal is where they will come from. If and when they come, the carp have the potential to destroy at a minimum a 7 billion dollar industry. Chicago says they need the waterway to allow iron ore shipments, but there other ways to ship the ore which needs to be delivered to wherever it is loaded onto boats in the first place. i.e. they can deliver it to the Illinois River instead of to the great lakes and then via the canal.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    6. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      The answer to invasive species like Asian carp is to introduce seals into the Great Lakes. Of course, you will need some polar bears to keep the seals in check.

      This might not be a completely bad solution if the seals preferred asian carp to salmon.
      You don't need polar bears to keep seals in check. I'm sure humans can do a decent job there.

    7. Re:Fear the Asian carp by sexconker · · Score: 1

      It goes pigeon, lizard, snake, gorilla.
      When winter time rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.

    8. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just rename Asian carp to North Korean carp and call in an airstrike?

    9. Re:Fear the Asian carp by InterGuru · · Score: 1

      Even if the canal were closed, it is a just a matter of time until someone with an evil bent or an adolescent sense of humor deliberately introduces a few carp into the lake -- that's all that's needed.

    10. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or a flood allows some Asian carp to cross over

    11. Re:Fear the Asian carp by khallow · · Score: 2

      I can't picture what you think the traffic flow is like. My understanding is that there's a lot of iron ore shipments going both ways (some mining occurs in both the Mississippi River basin and the Great Lakes, similarly, there's steelworks in both the Mid-Atlantic states and southern Alabama. Further, ships need to return so there would always be two-way traffic going through the Chicago canal.

    12. Re: Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the lakes do freeze over, how would there be elk and wolves naturally on the islands? And being from Flint, that was some of the best fishing till the lamprey got into there. Dove to nothing very soon after the overseas boats started dumping their ballast in the lakes. Lake perch actually tasted better then the lake trout and and definitely better over a campfire then salmon.

    13. Re:Fear the Asian carp by onepoint · · Score: 2

      While I know the above is all for a good laugh, but there is a small solution to the carp problem that could stem the flow. Figure out if the fish is any good for pet food. Then, if it's viable, legalize the sale of it to processors for non-commercial fisherman. Once a fisherman knows he can legally sell his catch, he's going to think, fuel is paid from the processor and I've got myself a vacation.
      While not the greatest solution, it's a simple and fun way to slow the fish down from crossing over into the lakes. Seems like a low risk solution.
      Also, while not a common food here in the USA, I ate carp a while back. It tasted fine, no bones to complain about, maybe it could turn into a retail fish for consumers.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    14. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They already are classed as an invasive species so can likely be caught in any amount by anyone. They are a fairly fun fish to bring in and make good fertilizer for the garden so I am doing my part to try and control the problem. I probably catch 20-30 of them a year in the early spring and fall and hand them out to neighbors and family who are looking to improve the soil in their gardens. Add to it that they are pretty easy to catch, a yellow leadhead with a nigh crawler bounced off the bottom seems to work really well in pool 2 on the Mississippi, so it is a great way to introduce a kid to fishing as they can actually catch some big fish without much effort.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    15. Re:Fear the Asian carp by onepoint · · Score: 1

      See, a person that is making an effort, While I know it's not a lot, it's a trickle.
      Back when I fished freshwater, I would sponsor a fishing trip to the local lake for the boy club of America and my friends tackle store.
      cost almost nothing, and introduced fishing to a group of about 15 kids.

      if you don't mind sharing your spot, you should post it around,
      less of these fish the better we all might be.

      note: even if they are an invasive species, permits might be required to sell them to a processor.
      here in florida I can not fish for drum without one, and that's off the surf.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    16. Re:Fear the Asian carp by operagost · · Score: 1

      That's the beauty of the plan. When summer comes, the polar bears will sweat to death.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    17. Re:Fear the Asian carp by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Further, ships need to return so there would always be two-way traffic going through the Chicago canal.

      Technically, the ships could return the long way: around Florida, up the east coast and through the St. Lawrence Seaway. (I'm not saying is a good idea, but it's possible.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    18. Re:Fear the Asian carp by ClayDowling · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If the Asian Carp shares the same fate as the rest of the invasive species that have infiltrated the lakes, expect walleye to start eating them sooner rather than later. Already walleye are eating zebra mussels and brown gobies. The downside is that the walleye fishery has changed a lot, because they're no longer interested in the bait that fishermen have to offer.

    19. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Stargoat · · Score: 1

      The Asian carp is not going to destroy a 7 billion dollar a year industry any more than the zebra mussel did. The Asian carp will change the 7 billion dollar a year industry. The Chinese love Asian carp. I have had it, it's not bad. If it had a better name, I suspect it would sell better. Call it Asian Whitefish or Pekin Perch, some nonsense like that.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    20. Re:Fear the Asian carp by An+dochasac · · Score: 2

      Even if the canal were closed, it is a just a matter of time until someone with an evil bent or an adolescent sense of humor deliberately introduces a few carp into the lake -- that's all that's needed.

      To those who still claim that humans are far too small to effect the environment, the Great Lakes are a great counterexample. Three times in my lifetime I've watched the biological ecosystem of these lakes change dramatically. The 70s Alewife invasions made hundreds of miles of beaches unbearable, the zebra mussels cleared the water but gave small fish no place to hide and allowed sunlight through to cause the huge blue-green algae blooms that shutdown Toledo's water supply this summer. The Asian carp carp invasion of the Great Lakes is a foregone conclusion. Their DNA is already in Lake Michigan and more exotic species such as the Yangzee river freshwater jellyfish are already found in tiny isolated inland lakes in the Wisconsin north woords. There isn't enough law enforcement to check all of the jet skis, kayaks, ski-boats, sailboats, fishing boats and prevent deliberate introduction. It's already too late, sustainability is impossible. Resilience and/or recovery are our only options.

    21. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe that there are at least 2 fish processors in Illinois that are making fertilizer out of asian carp (and food as well).

    22. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly!
      I proposed a fix and they said I was mad. My fix would have completely cleaned up the Asian Carp problem and not involved any silly electric barriers.
      You see, Bull Sharks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... are fresh water capable. They have an organ that allows them to do salinity adjustments in their body so they can adapt to fresh water. In the early 1900s one was actually caught near Chicago.
      So we start stocking the Mississippi with lots of young hungry bull sharks.
      They will grow at amazing speed as they stuff themselves with the Asian Carp. With the abundant carp I think they should pass world record sizes in the first year or two. Imagine how many carp a bull shark that is bigger than Australian great white, can eat in a day.
      Those carp will be gone in short order and I will have ridden my fame to another new job and completely forgotten the shark project by then.

    23. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am about the last one to defend the City of Chicago, but they have nothing to do with the electric barriers. That is the turf of the Illinois Dept of Natural Resources.

      If you are going to sling mud mindlessly, at least try to toss it in the right direction.

    24. Re:Fear the Asian carp by cusco · · Score: 1

      Carp and suckers are fairly fatty fish, you don't want to fry or bake them really. They're OK grilled, but they're outstanding in a smoker. The fat drips down and burns and everyone in the neighborhood knows that something delicious is about to be available. You may become very popular for an afternoon . . .

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    25. Re:Fear the Asian carp by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      They use trains to get the ore to port in Wisconsin in the first place. They could just as easily deliver it to a river port on the Illinois side as to Duluth. From what I understand, it is actually more of a barge canal, not one for ships. So any real ships would have to transfer there anyway, since there is no way a seven hundred foot ore carrier is going through the Chicago canal onto a river. And the great lakes are way to rough to pull barges meant for rivers.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    26. Re:Fear the Asian carp by onepoint · · Score: 1

      You could be right, but the problem is ... How do you legally sell them the fish.
      that's the big problem, how to sell it, document it, and track it.

      In NJ and FL (those are the 2 that I know the laws in), you cannot sell your catch.
      you can bring your catch and trade for smoked fish in NJ (well that was up to 2002 when I left)
      Drop off 10lbs of fish, take 3lbs. Home.
      In FL. You can bring the fish to a restaurant to be cooked for you.

      Tracking the fish for non-human consumption might lead to better management of the carp, and lead to other discoveries.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    27. Re:Fear the Asian carp by lazy+genes · · Score: 0

      Freshwater dolphins would be cool too.

    28. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      As they are a junk fish and I want them gone I let everyone know, above lock and dam #2 in Hastings and the below the Ford lock and dam. I usually fish above lock and dam #2 as it is closer but have fished just below the Ford dam where Minnehaha creek enters as well. If you go at the right time you can almost net the damn things in Minnehaha creek as well as the European carp because the current is so strong.

      Being an outdoorsman I want things to be around for my enjoyment and for others.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    29. Re:Fear the Asian carp by Herve5 · · Score: 2

      Why did you post AC? I miss a /. friend now :-)

      --
      Herve S.
  3. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No no we can yell at each other about you know... uh ...issues.

    Most stories posted to this site are of this ilk. They are looking for 1000+ discussions of who is right or wrong. We give it to them every time :(

  4. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is biology no longer a science? Is this not relevant to issues in the bioTECH sector?

  5. Just like the economy by readin · · Score: 1

    The natural environment is a survival of the fittest game where most actors look out for their own interests - pretty much like an economy. Is it any surprise that in both cases when we try to perform top-down management we fail due to unintended consequences?

    --
    I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    1. Re:Just like the economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wouldn't call the collapse of the salmon a failure. By introducing them, the invasive alewives were greatly reduced in number, which gave the native lake trout and walleyes a chance to recover.

    2. Re:Just like the economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we should just put all the non native species in the lake and let competition handle it?

    3. Re:Just like the economy by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Because splicing together foreign DNA in a lake worked so well last time

    4. Re:Just like the economy by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      This story really surprised me - I expected that sort of behaviour from a Socialist Five Year Plan but not really from the US. Even the instructions from the Party Secretary fit: "The fish division hasn't done anything new in 20 years. Get out there and do something big and spectacular.". The main difference is that the fishing would at least initially have been reserved for party members, maybe top party members.

      That story had a link to the next part which took a more modern approach. I found the whole thing fascinating.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    5. Re:Just like the economy by cusco · · Score: 1

      Has the situation of any native species ever improved because of the magical market forces? Ever? I can't think of one. Buffalo, beavers, wolves, condors, redwoods, otters, etc. would all be extinct if the top-down management had allowed "actors look out for their own interests". Individual people are myopic short-term actors, only when we band into larger organizations is anything worthwhile ever accomplished.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  6. Re:News for nerds by meerling · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's just the whiners. If it was an article about how slashdot moderates and scores posts with an extraterrestrial artificial intelligence package somebody would still post claiming that it's not relevant and not interesting why is this on slashdot.

  7. Great story of unintended consequences by Todd+Palin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What a great illustration of ecosystem complexity and unintended consequences that involves salmon, alewives, lamprey, zebra mussels, quagga mussels, and round gobies, all of which are non-native to the great lakes. After half a century of unpredicted swings of boom and bust the fishery managers are gradually moving toward restoration of something that resembles, at least faintly, the original lake trout and perch ecosystem. I'm sure more unintended consequences will be revealed as this plays out, but the ride certainly reveals the pitfalls of messing with mother nature.

    1. Re:Great story of unintended consequences by Mspangler · · Score: 2

      "gradually moving toward restoration of something that resembles, at least faintly, the original lake trout and perch ecosystem"

      The original ecosystem was a very large block of ice as of 25,000 years ago. The repopulation of the lakes after the glaciers melted back was very like the "freshly filled reservoir in the West." The upper Mississippi could repopulate from southern reaches, but how did the native (to humans) fish get back in the Lakes in the first place?

    2. Re:Great story of unintended consequences by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2

      Fish eggs are sticky, and will stick to the legs of wading birds at one pond/stream/lake and wash off in another.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    3. Re:Great story of unintended consequences by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1

      >After half a century of unpredicted swings of boom and bust the fishery managers are gradually moving toward restoration of something that resembles, at least faintly, the original lake trout and perch ecosystem.

      Which will also be subject to unpredicted swings of boom and bust.

      The idea that there's ever a balance of nature where the populations are stable is a complete fantasy, unpredictable swings are the norm. Ecologies are virtually always chaotic systems.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  8. chilean sea bass by Esra+Erimez · · Score: 1

    chilean sea bass just gives the the creeps.

    1. Re:chilean sea bass by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      How so? They just look like fish to me. Medium-sized, carnivorous fish. Don't seem to have any particularly objectionable habits.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  9. Lampreys in the Great Lakes by handy_vandal · · Score: 4, Informative

    Four lampreys are native to the Michigan Great Lakes region. Two are parasitic; two not. The two parasitic species, while they cause deep wounds, rarely kill their hosts.

    The Sea Lamprey is the relatively recent invader (1930s-40s) which has caused ecological havoc.

    THE FIVE LAMPREYS OF MICHIGAN' 5 GREAT LAKES

    --
    -kgj
  10. 99% immigrants. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America is the land of non-natives anyway

    1. Re:99% immigrants. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, none of us were born here.

  11. Why not fish for lamprey? by swb · · Score: 1

    They are a delicacy in France and could probably be used as dog food or a protein enhancer for other food stocks.

    1. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Some dog food potential; same as most french delicacies. Don't even get me started on Chinese delicacies. My dog wouldn't eat sea cucumber.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 1

      My dog wouldn't eat sea cucumber.

      Don't be too sure about that...

    3. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by neonKow · · Score: 1

      My neighbor's dog will eat plastic if you don't stop her. Dogs aren't as picky as you are.

    4. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      Not sure if the same kind of eel or if it makes any difference, but the Japanese like them too. Kind of oily, but good if prepared properly. The English used to like them but they got all squeamish about icky food.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    5. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by swb · · Score: 1

      The article I read say they approximated squid, if less chewy. IMHO squid and octopus don't really have a strong flavor -- they really just represent whatever they are cooked in (the Greeks seem to have a flair for them, oil and herbal seasoning).

      In fact, I think a lot of people could be served tripe if you cooked it like squid and never know the difference.

    6. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine them being much like squid or octopus. Seems the ones the Japanese favour are a different kind of eel. But how different can they be? Ship them to Japan! they have a shortage of their own kind of eels! Profit!

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    7. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure they're that closely related to eels. I've had eel in a Chinese restaurant and I didn't find it as good as squid and octopus.

    8. Re:Why not fish for lamprey? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      Eel is nothing like squid or octopus. Not sure where that notion came from. All good if prepared well but all distinct.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
  12. Biologist discovers trick to modify lake ecology! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Commercial fishing crews hate him!

  13. Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by mveloso · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is totally not a story about unintended consequences. If you read all three parts (which is a great read), you'll see that the cycle went like this:

    Native fish taken out by alweifes
    Alewifes taken out by Salmon
    Salmon taken out by too few alewives (overfeeding)
    Native species recover, because of no alewifes

    The original guy did exactly what he set out to do: destroy alewives with salmon and build a fishing economy. That was pretty successful. After that population crashed they eventually discovered that the original fish came back, due to the lack of alewives.

    The unintended consequences in this case are positive - marine biologists were able to learn something totally unexpected by doing experiments on a large scale.

    The original goal was never to get the native species back; it was to make the lakes back into a commercial fishery. Is the state today "better" because the native species are back? Who knows. Just because things are status quo ante doesn't mean it's better. That population is just as vulnerable to a die off as it used to be.

    That's why it's better to read the article instead of skimming it.

    1. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by kesuki · · Score: 2

      my biggest problem with the fine article because it jumped around more than inception. it was not written in sequence or with suitable foreshadowing for the 'jumps' it made.

      for maximum understanding and widest audience appeal it should only jump around when needed. the story should first use the first two paragraphs to sum the story, for the people who skim. after that it should have a clean flow of events in the order they occur chronologically. this isn't spider-man, and i realize how when writing you might want to simply put things in when you think of it, but the final draft should have those sections cut and pasted to the chronological timeline and then polished into the final draft.

    2. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My takeaway is that if someone on talk radio tries to give you a thirty second explanation (like all of their explanations) on what the government should or shouldn't be doing with respect to commerical fishing limits, you should change the channel. They don't know what they're talking about.

    3. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Meanwhile here in New England, the alewives' natural range, shad and alewives are so endangered it's illegal to take one except in a few larger rivers. The springtime herring run are largely gone, along with the massive influx of marine nutrients they brought to fresh waters.

      One of the things that always mystified me growing up fishing here was the incredible uniformity of freshwater fish species across water bodies with very little geographic connection. New England is dotted with thousands of small ponds, and they all have more or less the same fish. Even tiny little ponds of a few acres with no major tributaries and only seasonal outlets will have bluegill, yellow perch, and probably a few black bass lurking somewhere and reportedly some pike or muskellenge. How did they get there? And why aren't fish like bluegill from different watersheds distinctive, the way the finches Darwin found in different Galapagos islands were different? Surely natural dispersion of these fish across the whole region would have taken thousands of years.

      I was recently reading about the history of dams in the US, and got the answer. In the late 1800s inland fisheries across the country were collapsing because of dam building for powering mills, so the federal government set about restocking ponds and streams across the country. The scale must have been mind boggling, because you can find the same fish in tiny, isolated ponds that don't show up except on detailed topographical maps. Even the neighbors seem scarcely aware of these ponds, but at some point maybe a hundred years ago the federal government planted fish there.

      Looked at one way it was an astonishingly successful effort. There's almost no body of water in New England larger than a persistent puddle where a competent angler will catch *nothing*. And there are ponds not ten miles from Boston I can be certain of catching a half dozen crappie in a day and one or two largemouth bass -- certainly not trophy size, but enough to put up a game fight. But I often wonder what was in these waters before we crashed and rebooted the fish populations.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Meanwhile here in New England, the alewives' natural range, shad and alewives are so endangered it's illegal to take one except in a few larger rivers. The springtime herring run are largely gone, along with the massive influx of marine nutrients they brought to fresh waters.

      One of the things that always mystified me growing up fishing here was the incredible uniformity of freshwater fish species across water bodies with very little geographic connection. New England is dotted with thousands of small ponds, and they all have more or less the same fish. Even tiny little ponds of a few acres with no major tributaries and only seasonal outlets will have bluegill, yellow perch, and probably a few black bass lurking somewhere and reportedly some pike or muskellenge. How did they get there? And why aren't fish like bluegill from different watersheds distinctive, the way the finches Darwin found in different Galapagos islands were different? Surely natural dispersion of these fish across the whole region would have taken thousands of years.

      I was recently reading about the history of dams in the US, and got the answer. In the late 1800s inland fisheries across the country were collapsing because of dam building for powering mills, so the federal government set about restocking ponds and streams across the country. The scale must have been mind boggling, because you can find the same fish in tiny, isolated ponds that don't show up except on detailed topographical maps. Even the neighbors seem scarcely aware of these ponds, but at some point maybe a hundred years ago the federal government planted fish there.

      Looked at one way it was an astonishingly successful effort. There's almost no body of water in New England larger than a persistent puddle where a competent angler will catch *nothing*. And there are ponds not ten miles from Boston I can be certain of catching a half dozen crappie in a day and one or two largemouth bass -- certainly not trophy size, but enough to put up a game fight. But I often wonder what was in these waters before we crashed and rebooted the fish populations.

      That may be part of the explanation but It's not quite that simple. Canada and Scandinavia for example are dotted with isolated mountain lakes that also have various fish species living in them but in this part of the world there has never been an intentional large scale stocking effort which has long puzzled biologists. The current theory is that the eggs of the fish or the larvae are carried between lakes in in the feathers of water birds.

    5. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      because you can find the same fish in tiny, isolated ponds that don't show up except on detailed topographical maps. Even the neighbors seem scarcely aware of these ponds, but at some point maybe a hundred years ago the federal government planted fish there.

      The problem with your theory is that I know for a fact that those same fish show up in ponds that did not exist a hundred years ago. For that matter I know that those fish show up in ponds that the federal government (nor any other organization) ever planted fish in. The reason I know this is that I know the people who built the ponds and owned the land they were situated on when fish started to appear in them. And yes, some of these ponds now have fish in them, even though no one put them there and there is no way for fish to swim there from elsewhere.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    6. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, there's that too. If there's an impoundment with houses on it some resident will have stocked it. But there's still no diversity; they're stocking it with the descendents of hatchery fish.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    7. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One part here is also cultural geography, the two words wich basicly mean that humans do as they wish to make the enviroment pleasing to them. even if one man just plants a couple of fish in one pond, another unconnected person will do the same to another, just to have a getaway where just that person fishes or catches hes nutrients.

    8. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by trout007 · · Score: 1

      It only takes one predator carrying a pregnant fish from one pond to another to eat it and having the eggs wash into the pond to start. I'm sure they take off pretty quick with no large fish predators in the water.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    9. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by khallow · · Score: 1
      It's also possible that Native Americans were responsible for some of this. It can't be that hard to move fish eggs from one pond to another.

      Further, there is at least one example of non-human spread of fish species. The cut throat trout of Yellowstone Lake in Yellowstone National Park came originally from the Snake River watershed, but the lake currently drains into the Missouri River.

      At one time during the last glacial period, the Yellowstone Lake was dammed by a glacier and drained into the Snake River instead (its current level is about 150-200 feet shy in elevation of the Continental Divide which separates the two drainage basins. That gave the cut throat trout the opportunity to reach the lake. They aren't throughout the Missouri/Mississippi basin because there are two large waterfalls between the lake and the rest of the system. The higher waterfall is over 400 feet in height.

      But I often wonder what was in these waters before we crashed and rebooted the fish populations.

      Probably not much of anything. These lakes are probably all less than 14,000 years old and due to glacial activity.

    10. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by clintp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of the things that always mystified me growing up fishing here was the incredible uniformity of freshwater fish species across water bodies with very little geographic connection. New England is dotted with thousands of small ponds, and they all have more or less the same fish. Even tiny little ponds of a few acres with no major tributaries and only seasonal outlets will have bluegill, yellow perch, and probably a few black bass lurking somewhere and reportedly some pike or muskellenge. How did they get there? And why aren't fish like bluegill from different watersheds distinctive, the way the finches Darwin found in different Galapagos islands were different?

      From Michigan here, lots of unconnected lakes and ponds here too.

      It was always explained to me that they get there carried on the feet of waterfowl. Ducks and such land in the shallows and weeds, feet get covered in eggs. Ducks move on. Sometimes they're stocked by property owners or the DNR.

      The fish *are* genetically diverse. Big fishing tournaments rely on this fact and do genetic testing on fish to make sure they came from the correct lake.

      --
      Get off my lawn.
    11. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ducks and other waterbirds carry fish eggs in their feathers. So they seed unpopulated new lakes with fish.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Simple answer is birds.
      Fish tend to release lots of eggs into the water. Some stick to legs and feathers of water birds. When the birds land in body of water that has no fish those eggs have a very good chance of hatching and growing to full size.
      Repeat.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    13. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      You are missing my point. Some of these ponds were never stocked by anyone, yet they have fish in them. As I said, I know this because I know the people who built the ponds and continued to own the land the ponds were situated on when fish were found in them.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    14. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, that is certainly a possible (and I think likely) explanation. My point is that the evidence suggests that the lack of diversity the poster I replied to is likely NOT the result of the massive stocking program which he postulated.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    15. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I would just had assumed the ice left them behind :) (and more water/sea and fish.)

    16. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Clearly you've just proved "spontaneous generation" exists. :-).

      I would recommend that you reword your statement to "...were never intentionally stocked..." . It's quite possible that some species (or their larvae) hitchhiked on boats (as shellfish have been demonstrated to do).

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    17. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I would recommend that you reword your statement to "...were never intentionally stocked..."

      The word "stocked" contains within it the connotation of being done intentionally. Since, the general theory about how fish get into a landlocked body of water is that from time to time some fish eggs stick to the legs of waterfowl and rinse off/hatch in a different body of water. I have never heard that referred to as being stocked.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    18. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by awfar · · Score: 1

      I am not convinced of any altruism, and that the Salmon were necessarily for commercial fishing jobs (though that was stated as the Fed's intention and a well-known Pacific industry), but for Sport Fishing of larger fish, what, already being rediscovered in the 50s and 60s. It also appears that US fish canneries were well in decline by then. Already an outdoorsman haven and large tourist industry, the very notion of of the extreme profits to be made turning Northern Michigan even further into a Sports Fisherman's paradise could not have been far from their mind. You only have to drive the area to understand what was at stake; everywhere thousands of mom and pop motels, cabins, restaurants, barely surviving through the off seasons with the potential for millions.. The Lake Trout were already excellent fish but long growing and non-fighters if taken from the deep (can confirm - used to take Lake Trout from >120ft depths, by hand easily). And, I experienced the alewhive infestations of the 60s - not pretty.

    19. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by cusco · · Score: 1

      Not many fish live-birth, you would need a male to fertilize those eggs. Normally the fertilized eggs are carried on plant matter stuck to ducks, or occasionally the eggs stick to the birds themselves.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    20. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      You are missing my point. Some of these ponds were never stocked by anyone, yet they have fish in them. As I said, I know this because I know the people who built the ponds and continued to own the land the ponds were situated on when fish were found in them.

      Well, nobody that knew about it. Sounds like some of the stuff my uncles would do growing up on the farm. Stock a neighbor's pond because they'd rather fish there the next season than travel all the way to the lake.

    21. Re:Wrong conclusion: not "unintended consequences" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      That would make sense, except, why would you throw fish into a pond so that you can catch them again next year to eat them? It takes several years before a new born fish is large enough to eat. So, if you are stocking a pond you are either doing it with fish that are already large enough to eat (or close to it), or you are willing to wait a few years before you are expecting to catch them. BTW, if you want to suggest that your uncles would have thrown the ones they caught that were too small that year, to catch them again next year, they were taking a very large risk, since fish that small risk a significant fine if you are caught with them by the game commission.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  14. If Gordon Lightfoot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Writes a song about him, THEN you know he mattered. Until that time, he's just like any one else looking for their 15 minutes.

    And "sport fishing" is right up ther with "golf is a sport" crowd.

  15. Is it really true? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Funny

    The story sounds a little too fishy.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Is it really true? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Sounds like this guy's plan was a bit too large in scale.

    2. Re:Is it really true? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like this guy's plan was a bit too large in scale.

      Wait was that a pun? I thought this was the pun thread?

      Perhaps your pun was just carp. Or maybe I am just being a pike-r.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    3. Re:Is it really true? by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      Sounds like this guy's plan was a bit too large in scale.

      Wait was that a pun? I thought this was the pun thread?

      Perhaps your pun was just carp. Or maybe I am just being a pike-r.

      With all of this angling for puns, it's time to give this thread the hook.

    4. Re:Is it really true? by sconeu · · Score: 1

      The original pun was definitely crappie.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:Is it really true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should throw that one back.

    6. Re:Is it really true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where can that fish be? It is a most elusive fish!
      And it went wherever I did go.
      Ooooh, fishy, fishy, fishy fish!
      A-fish, a-fish, a-fish, a-fishy, ooooh.
      Ooooh, fishy, fishy, fishy fish!
      That went wherever I did go.

    7. Re:Is it really true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never thought this article would be useful research.

  16. There is one solution by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1
    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    1. Re:There is one solution by mmontour · · Score: 1
    2. Re:There is one solution by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Ok, that is pretty freaking awesome too.

      Next will be a Fish Rifle, and Fish Tanks... we can have a whole fish arsenal.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  17. Re:News for nerds by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1, Funny

    A lot of people seem to think that Slashdot is only supposed to be about IT, even though IT is just the most uninteresting part of computer technology. It's the janitor part of computers.

  18. Crows in Singapore, Rabbits in Australia ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was no crow in Singapore

    There was no rabbit in Australia

    There was no salmon in the Great Lakes

    There was no black in the Americas

    BUT NOW THERE ARE !!

    No matter if it's Salmon in the Great Lakes, or Crows in Singapore, or Rabbits in Australia, or Blacks in the Americas, all these are examples of ecology being totally fucked up by White Skin human beings

    1. Re:Crows in Singapore, Rabbits in Australia ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see how you conveniently left out that there were no Whites in the Americas either.

    2. Re: Crows in Singapore, Rabbits in Australia ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to say only white skin, conservative, tea - party males. Cause it's always their fault.

  19. Genetic viability is also a long term concern by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1

    Out west, where the original Oncorhynchus (so called Great Lakes salmon and Rainbow trout) stock came from we are experiencing a decline in the viability of stocks because of hatchery methods. Perhaps the decline in stocks in Lake Huron is partly due to this problem as well as a drop in feed levels. The entire marine habitat of the Georgia Straight as well as the Straights of Juan de Fuca is losing resident native strains of Oncorhynchus because of the loss of viable in stream rearing habitat on the rivers and creeks that are essential to the life cycle of west coast salmon.

    In turn we are seeing a drop in populations of many native species that predate upon the salmon, including the resident Orca pods.

    Out here our answer to the problems is to use the few remaining herring and instead feed it to farmed salmon in pens. In fact one of the arguements for the expansion of the fish farming industry is the fact that we have screwed up the viability of the existing one, so go ahead mess it up completely! As the genetic viability of the hatchery stocks declines over the next few decades then just maybe we might start to take action in the place where it is needed most, kicking out the idiots who are doing the damage and exposing the practices of fish farming for what they are not what they pretend to be.

    Just maybe the loss of the sport fishery in the Great Lakes will serve as a wake up call to the idiots who oversee the fisheries, if not it is time to turf them out of their fat chairs in Ottawa, Washington and the provinces of BC, Ontario and states like Michigan where the management of our fisheries has become the realm of short sighted morons who bend to industrial interests.

    --
    This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
    1. Re:Genetic viability is also a long term concern by Required+Snark · · Score: 2
      The shorter version: you didn't bother to read the article.

      It talks a lot about the actual decision making process, which you did not reference. It also goes into great detail on how sport fishing has been a major driving force in fishery policy since the introduction of salmon in the late 1960's. It ends with the current dilemma of balancing between the re-emergence of trout as the primary sport fish vs the salmon, which are not doing well. The irony is that a trout friendly ecosystem is much closer to the way the lakes were before the man made changes that lead to the introduction of salmon in the first place.

      You'd rather just whine in complete ignorance rather then read something interesting and become more knowledgeable. Pathetic.

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    2. Re:Genetic viability is also a long term concern by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1

      "You'd rather just whine in complete ignorance rather then read something interesting and become more knowledgeable. Pathetic."

      A complete ignorance of native species within an ecosystem is the problem sir. The use of the word "trout" is symptomatic of the ignorance of the general populace, especially in the east. The native char species of the Great Lakes have a tendency to be slow growing variants, in fact the actual age of mature Salvelinus that were the predominant top shelf predators of Superior and Huron are very poorly understood. Some have a life span that is many times longer than any Oncorhynchus. And as for ignorance well what can I say, other than it is extremely unfortunate that we tend to ignore the individuals who warned against these interventions in the first place.

      No matter how well intentioned, putting an artificial construct into a robust ecosystem by completely ignoring how it works in the first place is the problem and those who advocate this policy usually have a very short term monetary interest in mind not the environment especially some idiots out west here that have actually illegally planted all sorts of eastern species.

      No sir the ignorance is much deeper and problematic than my rant, the problems start by taking the easy way out by creating artificial fisheries that cannot work in the long term instead of embarking upon long term habitat stewardship and is the core of the issue here.

      --
      This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
  20. communist fish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    attacking US of A. As we see nothing Putin does works but Asian invasion of US waters is highly successful. Time to start teh bohmbehrs?

  21. The Invisible Hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, I see. An acolyte of The Invisible Hand!

  22. Re:News for nerds by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    A lot of people seem to think that Slashdot is only supposed to be about IT, even though IT is just the most uninteresting part of computer technology. It's the janitor part of computers.

    It's because IT employees don't get anything else. Don't take their slashdot, too!

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. The CARP WILL WIN by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Frankly both the invasive carp as well as the snake head fish are something that interest fishermen and others. Opinions may vary but I'd bet money that a few people will quite deliberately sneak both species into the great lakes. Obviously when this occurs other species may not be able to do well at all but the fishermen will be able to easely catch carp and snake heads. Although the carp would be better raised in fish farms they could be considered a resource as they taste ok. We have had snale heads in south Florida since 1980 and maybe even before that. I've caught quite a few but never cooked one. They are simply a larger version of the American bowfin which have always existed in Florida.

    1. Re:The CARP WILL WIN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snakehead isn't related to Bowfin (they just look alike).

      Also, the Asian Carp isn't likely to be introduced intentionally into Lake Michigan. Speculation is that Snakeheads were introduced intentionally, because they command high prices in Chinese supermarkets. Asian carp, not so much.

  24. Credit where it's due by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    How One Man Changed the Ecology of the Great Lakes With Salmon

    Seems to me like the salmon did all the hard work.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  25. Some of us by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

    This is relevant to nerds and technology how?

    Some of us are eco-nerds.

    Seriously. Planets and space habitats will need ecological engineering - the real stuff, not the eco-wacko knee-jerks.

    Examinations of how this horrendously complex system works when tweaked are definitely "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters".

    There are lots of different sorts of nerds, and lots of nerds geek out on many different technologies each. If you sometimes see nerd-fodder that isn't on one of YOUR subjects on Slashdot, suck it up and shut up, while the nerds of THAT topic finally get to have THEIR conversation.

    We get enough of that disruptive raining-on-our-parade from the jocks.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  26. fishing quota? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was thinking a fishing quota for residents and commercial fishing would solve the issue of overfishing. Maybe I am missing something. Plus people need to be educated about bringing non-native species to an environment. Look at the impacts cane toads in Australia or the Northern Snakehead fish in the mid-Atlantic States in the United States of America. Just saying.

  27. New threat: Goby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a northern IL local, and sometimes fish Lake Michigan.

    The big new threat of late is the Goby, which as far as I know no native fish feed on. It's sort of like a Sculpin (which is native), but it's what all the local fishermen have been bitching about.

    The asian carp may eventually come, but there's a pretty effective eradication program underway on the IL river. There's a company that has started to harvest them to sell as food and fertilizer. I can't find the YT video offhand, but there's one floating around of the commercial fishermen filling up their boats with gill nets. Apparently, after removing millions of fish over the last few years, they are starting to really put a dent in their numbers, to the point where they mention it's not as profitable as it used to be.

  28. As a Queenslander.... by Zenocide · · Score: 1

    Would you like some cane toads?

  29. Oprah has a solution for invasive species... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of her give away shows should do it:

    "You get a carp!"

    "You get a carp!"

  30. Re:News for nerds by ClayDowling · · Score: 1

    Some of us nerds enjoy fishing the very waters discussed in this article. If you think folks don't nerd out about fishing, you haven't spent much time around fishermen.

  31. Salmon in the great lakes has been pretty good by ninjagin · · Score: 1

    I have sport-fished salmon in lake Michigan, and it was great. A lot of fun, and good eating. Caught a few really nice trout, too. I do worry, though, about the decline of commercial fishing in the great lakes (gosh, the whitefish that used to get pulled out of those lakes was incredible!), the zebra mussels and the asian carp.

    --
    .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R