Lionfish update

[spawner]

Some scary and interesting papers.
Reef Note in Coral Reefs:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/n48 ... ltext.html



Paper in MEPS


Invasive Indo-Pacific lionfish Pterois volitans reduce recruitment of Atlantic coral-reef fishes
Mark A. Albins*, Mark A. Hixon
Department of Zoology, Oregon State University, 3029 Cordley Hall, Corvallis, Oregon 97331, USA
*Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT: The Indo-Pacific lionfish Pterois volitans, introduced to Florida waters in the early 1990s, is currently spreading rapidly throughout the Caribbean region. This invasive carnivore may cause deleterious changes in coral-reef ecosystems via predation on native fishes and invertebrates as well as competition with native predators. We conducted a controlled field experiment using a matrix of translocated coral and artificial patch reefs to examine the short-term effects of lionfish on the recruitment of native reef fishes in the Bahamas. Lionfish caused significant reductions in the recruitment of native fishes by an average of 79% over the 5 wk duration of the experiment. This strong effect on a key life stage of coral-reef fishes suggests that invasive lionfish are already having substantial negative impacts on Atlantic coral reefs. While complete eradication of lionfish in the Atlantic is likely impossible, it would be prudent to initiate focused lionfish control efforts in strategic locations.

KEY WORDS: Invasive species · Predation · Community interactions · Piscivory · Marine fishes

 

[PeterIMA]

I keep getting a steady stream of reports concerning the spread of the Pacific lionfish in the Atlantic. It has now spread south to the Dominican Republic and other islands in the Caribbean.

There is a new paper that covers the spread and their biology/ecology that was just published in the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute (GCFI) Proceedings Vol. 61 (2009). If anyone wants a copy as a PDF send me a PM.


Sincerely,
Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

DR was reported to having them several years ago (Ask Bob)

 

[Anonymous]

They are all over NC & VA in cooler waters. They are actively reproducing too.

 

[Fish Finder]

even in NY. Here is a pic of some i caught. I get about 50-100 per season.

 

[jhemdal1]

The real scary news is that they have found them in the Florida Keys just last week. You might wonder why I find that frightening, well - they started their spread from Miami / Palm Beach, moving northward. They then either curved back on a gyre or there was a second introduction (more likely IMO) and they infested Haiti, DR, Belize and the Bahamas. From there, the currents have taken them to the Florida Keys (they never did move south from their original point of release) so now they have come FULL CIRCLE and the deed is done.

Jay

 

[swsaltwater]

Too bad the current Pork barrel stimulus package did not offer 40 - 100 million to send all willing scuba divers to hunt them.........hehe I would rather like that.

 

[spawner]

You can look for them to be banned from importation soon. The list of approved (New HR Bill) species will most likely not include any species Lionfish, thus banning them.

 

[swsaltwater]

hr 669 will shut the whole ball of wax down. I do not think the fish or reptile industry would be viable after those pass. It's not just lionfish pushing it, it is snakeheads, cobras(everglades), pythons (everglades), etc etc etc.......Too many retarded things being kept and released around the country, I would say no way it gets passed but they passed the pork plan.....

 

[spawner]

expect it to pass in some form. That is what I am being told.

 

[Anonymous]

expect it to pass in some form. That is what I am being told.

Same here.

 

[spawner]

Yea that is what I figured, I can't be the only one hearing these things.

When it passes, in some form, the industry will have three years to get an approved list of species for importation.

The bothersome part and where it's going to kill the industry, is the live rock issue. USDA takes an aggressive stance on the importation of soil. They might classify live rock as they currently classify soil. In other words, by stock in the guys with live rock leases in Florida.

Also the language in the bill prohibits the sell of an organism not the importation of it. So it might not matter if you catch your lionfish from NY, NC or FL you still would not be able to legally sell it. Others have discussed banning the importation of lionfish from the pacific and allowing the importation of them from the Atlantic to encourage islanders to collect and sell them.

RFI is really trying to get some work done on the hobbyist end of things and set up a situation where any store takes back anything live always, no questions asked. If that could be set up quickly it might do a lot of good and provide an alternative to banning species or groups of species.

 

[swsaltwater]

Even if stores took back livestock people will still release illegally caught or kept animals, not sure how I would react if a customer strolled in with a cobra lol.........My question is who will make the list, a lot of what this industry loves is newly discovered species for market...... How long to add to the list......

 

[spawner]

SEC. 4. LIST OF APPROVED SPECIES.

(a) Requirement To Issue List of Approved Species-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 36 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a list of nonnative wildlife species approved for importation into the United States.

(2) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN SPECIES- The Secretary shall not include in the list--

(A) any species included in the list of prohibited species under section 5; or

(B) any species, the importation of which is prohibited by any other Federal law or regulation of the United States due to the likelihood of causing harm to the economy, the environment, or other animal species or human health.

(3) REVISION- The Secretary may revise the list issued under this section based on available scientific and commercial information.

 

[dizzy]

When it passes, in some form, the industry will have three years to get an approved list of species for importation.

Not to worry ..........................that list....... aka MAC certification is already being drawn. While it currently may not be the most desirable list, perhaps it can grow some in 3-years. At least the three years gives you time to train in another field. Growth areas will be in government work or caring for the ageing baby boomers. Use the time wisely and good luck.

 

[PeterIMA]

Dizzy, Can you explain your comment about the MAC clean list? The MAC has done very little (nothing?) concerning the creation of lists (clean or otherwise). Has this changed?

Marshall Myers of PIJAC (associated closely with MAC) has spent most of his career fighting legislation that attempted to restrict imports through the creation of clean or dirty lists. In fact he recently received an award for his efforts from Ornamental Fish International.


Peter

 

[dizzy]

Peter,
It's not rocket surgery. Once HR669 is passed something like MAC certification will be required before a fish can be imported. I noticed QM is carrying several MAC certified fish these days, although not enough to keep the industry vibrant IMO.

Marshall Myers happens to be a supporter of MAC certification IIRC. Regardless of any success he may of had in the past (fighting restrictive legislation), times have changed with the appointment of people like Cass Sunstein in the Obama administration. It's called change you can believe in.

 

[PeterIMA]

I was not aware of House Resolution 669. I just downloaded it. The last posting on RDO was about draft Hawiiaan draft legislation. This is draft federal legislation.

I must admit, HR 669 looks draconian. I understand that there is a need to prohibit the importation of organisms that are harmful to the environment or will compete with native species. Many states already have "dirty lists" that prohibit the importation and sale of organisms that may be harmful (in the sense previously mentioned).

HR 669 appeares to be inclusive of all fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians. In one part they discuss the need to not import species that are harmful. So, one would expect that Congress could come up with a law that specifies which species are potentially harmful and cannot be imported (like pythons). Hence, there may be a need for a Federal "Dirty List".

But later they discuss what is essentially a "clean list". If the species is not listed as acceptable, it will not be legal to import it. The imposition of fees could make it very costly to add benign species onto the "Clean List". If this is the case and it becomes law, the pet trade (not just the fish trade) may be at risk.

However, I don't see any discussion of Certification or the requirement that all species be criminalized before they can be allowed (through exceptions by addition to the Clean List) as was presented in the Case Bill (submitted to the House twice but not enacted). However, that may be the intent. It is not clear that this has anything to do with the Marine Aquarium Council (MAC). I think it has more to do with concerns about harmful wildlife (like pythons, poisonous animals etc).

I recently downloaded a paper from the OFI Journal that discusses recentl legislation in Europe. Ornamental Fish International (OFI) managed to convince the European Union (EU) not to consider tropical fish as a threat to the environment, since they were being imported as pets for maintenance in closed systems such as aquariums or ponds not accessable to natural systems. The EU made an exception for this, that limits the impact of EU legistation on the aquarium trade. Perhaps PIJAC or other trade organizations in the USA can convince Congress to also take this into consideration. Organisms being imported only become a threat if they are released into the wild.

It does suggest to me that the Pet Industry in the USA needs to do more to educate consumers to ensure that pet animals are not released to natural systems.

Peter Rubec

 

[dizzy]

Peter,
You are right that this bill in its current form does not address the issues of sustainability. However most bills get various amendments and add-ons before they reach their final form. I guess I was thinking about that Hawaiian bill sort influencing this one somehow. Time will tell.

 

[spawner]

I was not aware of House Resolution 669. I just downloaded it. The last posting on RDO was about draft Hawiiaan draft legislation. This is draft federal legislation.

I must admit, HR 669 looks draconian. I understand that there is a need to prohibit the importation of organisms that are harmful to the environment or will compete with native species. Many states already have "dirty lists" that prohibit the importation and sale of organisms that may be harmful (in the sense previously mentioned).

HR 669 appeares to be inclusive of all fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians. In one part they discuss the need to not import species that are harmful. So, one would expect that Congress could come up with a law that specifies which species are potentially harmful and cannot be imported (like pythons). Hence, there may be a need for a Federal "Dirty List".

But later they discuss what is essentially a "clean list". If the species is not listed as acceptable, it will not be legal to import it. The imposition of fees could make it very costly to add benign species onto the "Clean List". If this is the case and it becomes law, the pet trade (not just the fish trade) may be at risk.

However, I don't see any discussion of Certification or the requirement that all species be criminalized before they can be allowed (through exceptions by addition to the Clean List) as was presented in the Case Bill (submitted to the House twice but not enacted). However, that may be the intent. It is not clear that this has anything to do with the Marine Aquarium Council (MAC). I think it has more to do with concerns about harmful wildlife (like pythons, poisonous animals etc).

I recently downloaded a paper from the OFI Journal that discusses recentl legislation in Europe. Ornamental Fish International (OFI) managed to convince the European Union (EU) not to consider tropical fish as a threat to the environment, since they were being imported as pets for maintenance in closed systems such as aquariums or ponds not accessable to natural systems. The EU made an exception for this, that limits the impact of EU legistation on the aquarium trade. Perhaps PIJAC or other trade organizations in the USA can convince Congress to also take this into consideration. Organisms being imported only become a threat if they are released into the wild.

It does suggest to me that the Pet Industry in the USA needs to do more to educate consumers to ensure that pet animals are not released to natural systems.

Peter Rubec

It is all about education and the willingness of shops to take anything at any time. We need to develop a network of Vets to properly euthanize snakes, bird or other non fish organisms. We need to train LFSs how to properly euthanize fish. Provide them with the chemicals. This all needs to be organized and offered as a no questions asked, no cost service. Maybe even give the donor a coupon of some sort for doing the right thing. Personally I see no reason why a donor would ever need to know what the end point of the returned animal was. If it is something that can be sold great if not, then it needs to be properly euthanized. I can't tell you how many large snakes, frogs and freshwater fish we refused when I worked in retail. The stupidity of selling fish and other animals that will shortly out grow any possible enclosure or tank a hobbyist has is a big part of the problem but I don't see that changing anytime soon.