[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Collecting fears.......
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone, this is my outlook on
the situation. Everybody has an opinion on what's right, but like most
things in life, if you use things in moderation and wisely, then it is
I've got to way in here, In other words homo sapiens (that's us) are
not part of the environment or the ecosystem they live in.
. All things alive and dead a reacted on in a certain environment by
I hope this makes some sense? If not, I'm trying to say is all
creatures use things around them in there daily lives, but recently we
started forgetting where we (humans) fit in, unless maybe we were
planted here by aliens and really are an introduced species.
Sorry everyone about going overboard, but I know we can get along
with and use our natural resources , now that is a fact.
On Tue, 1 Sep 1998 00:23:34 -0700 "Norman Edelen"
<normane at edelendoors_com> writes:
>I can agree with Jay here. Gambusia affinis tends to produce fry in
>numbers, but also tend to eat their fry in large numbers. They are
>cannibalistic. They also have an accelerated growth rate compared to
>livebearers, believed to be an evolutionary adaptation responding to
>pressures of cannibalism. They help keep their numbers down
>Add to that fact other predators in the system and you strike some
>balance. Unfortunately Gambusia affinis has been introduced outside
>native environment, and thus high fecundity can become an aid to
>these new territories. In it's native range it really isn't a
>The North American Native Fishes Association: over
>20 years of conservation efforts, public education, and
>aquarium study of our native fishes. Check it out at
>From: Jay DeLong <jdelong at nwifc_wa.gov>
>To: 'nfc at actwin_com' <nfc at actwin_com>; 'nanfa at aquaria_net'
><nanfa at aquaria_net>
>Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 10:42 PM
>Subject: RE: Collecting fears.......
>>> while I can appreciate the person's concern, it certainly helps a
>>> population in the sense that fewer mouths to feed mean a
>>> healthier, more
>>> dynamic population, especially in the case of our most prolific
>>> species who can quickly overcrowd and overcome their
>>> environments; as in the case of the native mosquitofish, the
>>Whoa-- this is an opening large enough to walk through! I disagree
>>this. I think the only times when we can help fish by removing them
>>when we humans have screwed up their environment or ecosystem first.
>>There's no fish that we are helping by removing them from their
>>environment except when their environment is so degraded from habitat
>>destruction or pollution that individuals are saved by removing them
>>rearing them elsewhere, as with some very rare fish.
>>The most prolific fish evolved their high fecundity for reasons which
>>are NOT detrimental to the survival of the population. Fish with
>>fecundity rates are generally ones with poor survival. They're like
>>mice of the fish world. Most are forage fish which receive little or
>>parental care. Their survival is dependent upon producing large
>>numbers, not prevented by it.
>>Any opposing thoughts on this?
>>Olympia, WA, USA
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]