Lionfish on East Coast....?

[DandyDon]

I'm sure that there is a Marine Biologist writing his or her thesis on this situation. Interesting that they have adapted to the colder water temps.

I heard the same story. That during hurricane Andrew some of these fish got released in the Ocean and started a breeding colony. The only problem is that I never saw them in Florida when I dove there and wonder why they would migrate north. I know NC is a nice place but it is certainly not tropical.

Y'all ever dived off of North Carolina? Off of Morehead City, anyway - not that cold off shore. The Gulf Stream pumps warm water up there year 'round. On the other hand, waters are cooler closer in, and lionfish haven't been found in shallow water, I don't think. The fish would have followed the Gulf Stream up, like many native tropicals do, and/or been released by hobbyists locally.

I don't think the issue is safety when talking about lionfish. We have them in abundance on the GBR, you just keep out of their way and don't touch.
It could have effects further on down the food chain though I suspect, if they get out of control in your neck of the woods.

I've been stuck by them in aquariums, but the venom in captive fish is weaker. Still, not all that bad. The ones spotted have all been in the Pterois genus, possibly volitans speice, which are no deadlier than bee stings - depending on an individual's hypersensity to such. They are in the same family as deadly Stonefish, but not nearly as dangerous.

I think the primary problem is that they will prey on juviniles and other small fishes which have no natural instinct to avoid them. Indeed, I expect that many native fishes will see the feathery fins as vegatation, and actually try to hide in the predators fins.

 

[DivePartner1]

I don't know if we have more and better stories. Isn't this the story all over the world?

My own favorite divepartner has regaled me with horror stories of blankets of non-native mice swarming like blankets over the Outback, clearing a path like locusts.

Despite the nonsense we see on this thread by others as this being 'natural', to introduce a non-native species is like peeing in someone else's well. It ravishes the habitance, often irreparably. A lot of eco-babble is junk science, but this kind of damage is elementary and self-evident.

 

[Wreck]

I think the Lion Fish offer a revenue and sporting opportunity. Put a bounty on them and encourage spear fishing. This would but beat a future a sterile wrecks lacking native fish and covered by these toxic, diver-endangering foriegners.

I'm not sure I would want to bother with dragging a bunch of these spiney critters up to the boat just for a bounty and risk getting poked in the process, much less dangling that stringer around at the safety stop with other divers blindly hovering about. Retrieving lift bags with weighted stringers probably doesn't fit the dive boat operators' idea of something they wouldn't mind doing a lot.

 

[The Kraken]

"Despite the nonsense we see on this thread by others as this being 'natural',"

I think the point that AD was making is that the method by which the fish arrived in the Atlantic is a "natural" occurence in the overall order of the planet.
The bird that picked up a seed in its feathers and deposited that seed on a desert island did not do so intentionally, but the end result is the same as it would have been if the transport of that seed were intentional.
The transport of the zebra mollusk by a ship is a good parallel.
The only difference in the two scenarios is the fact that one was done by a wild creature and the other by an instrument created of man.
Man is a natural element in the grand scheme of things and whatever the result of his actions, accidental or intended, good or bad, are a part of the natural progression of the earth.

 

[adshepard]

"Despite the nonsense we see on this thread by others as this being 'natural',"

I think the point that AD was making is that the method by which the fish arrived in the Atlantic is a "natural" occurence in the overall order of the planet.
The bird that picked up a seed in its feathers and deposited that seed on a desert island did not do so intentionally, but the end result is the same as it would have been if the transport of that seed were intentional.
The transport of the zebra mollusk by a ship is a good parallel.
The only difference in the two scenarios is the fact that one was done by a wild creature and the other by an instrument created of man.
Man is a natural element in the grand scheme of things and whatever the result of his actions, accidental or intended, good or bad, are a part of the natural progression of the earth.

That was my exact point. All too often we forget that man is part of nature, above it all, somehow different. We are part of the grand scheme.

You may not like the result of a somehow introduced species but the fact of the matter is "that's life". Heck I don't think the dinosaurs liked a meteor dropping on them millions of years ago either. The meteor changed things (in theory). Man and everything else somehow in their own way change things all the time. Creatures come and go. Things evolve. We won't be on this earth forever in the form we're in now. We will evolve, go extinct, travel elsewhere. That is the way of nature and life.

Do I find it sad sometimes to see an introduced creature takeover and elimnate a currently native creature? Sure most everytime. But I also enjoy watching the change and seeing how things react to change.

Just last November I documented the arrival of Thecacera pennigera, a nudibranch to New England. It is not a native species. It is a notorious hitchhiker among the fouling organisms on ships hulls. Could it do damage to native species? We're not sure yet. We're not sure if it even survived our harsh winter conditions. But it will be interesting to see just what happens.

Enjoy nature and remember we are part of nature not in charge of it.

DSDO

Alan

 

[The Kraken]

Well, I think I'll extract myself from the "Origin of the Species" debate and return to the thread.
Can I assume that as long as the fish is left alone, not touched or provoked, it can be observed in its natural state without undue concern?
I have no idea as to what level of population is required to maintain a breeding colony, buy perhaps there are not enough specimens to maintain a viable population.
This may start another heated discussion, but should the proposition be considered to eliminate the existing specimens in an effort to prevent breeding?

 

[adshepard]

Well, I think I'll extract myself from the "Origin of the Species" debate and return to the thread.
Can I assume that as long as the fish is left alone, not touched or provoked, it can be observed in its natural state without undue concern?
I have no idea as to what level of population is required to maintain a breeding colony, buy perhaps there are not enough specimens to maintain a viable population.
This may start another heated discussion, but should the proposition be considered to eliminate the existing specimens in an effort to prevent breeding?

According to some estimates the population exceeds 1,000 individuals of various sizes on the US east coast which would seem to indicate that they are already breeding. Long term survival of course is still in question. But then again the long term survival of anything is always in question.

DSDO

Alan

 

[DivePartner1]

I think the point that AD was making is that the method by which the fish arrived in the Atlantic is a "natural" occurence in the overall order of the planet.

I understand the point. I just believe its irresponsable.

 

[LioKai]

I understand the point. I just believe its irresponsable.

I agree with you.