Facebook YouTube Tacklewarehouse.com
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Top Calfishing.com Calfishing.com Main Board topic #4960
View in linear mode

Subject: "A Tale of Two Quaggas" Previous topic | Next topic
swimbaitMon Apr-21-08 11:42 PM
Charter member
9890 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#4960, "A Tale of Two Quaggas"


  

          

Equus quagga quagga, otherwise known simply as the Quagga lived in South Africa and was a close relative of the zebra. I say was because this species was rendered extinct in 1833 through hunting and pointless killing to reduce competition with herd animals. If a half-zebra half-horse looking critter sounds far fetched, just read .

The quagga we all know (and don't love) has a similar coloration, but the similarities end there. In contrast to its mammalian namesake, the quagga mussel has no trouble surviving man's every attempt to eradicate it and keep it from spreading. We label it as invasive and describe areas where it lives as "infected".

On the other hand, if you stroll through the article linked above you learn that people around the world are attempting to bring back extinct species through somatic cell nuclear transfer (that's cloning). We would never refer to an extinct species brought back through cloning as "invasive". We'd never call the place where it lived "infested". Rather the nightly news would celebrate the fact that one half-horse half-zebra lived in the face of human induced destruction. Hooray!

For some reason, as citizens of a modern world, we feel compelled to save and preserve that which is rare, and decry those species who are common and good at expanding their range. Yes, the quagga mussel creates a nuisance when you are in the business of moving water to faucets, but South African farmers in the 1800's thought that quagga zebras were quite a nuisance as well. They did, after all, go through the trouble of killing each and every one.

My point is - who is right? And what is right? Does preserving biodiversity fly in the face of Darwinism? Do we really know best when it comes to nature? Should we attempt to arbitrate which species are allowed to spread, and which species should be saved at all costs?

It seems that our collective track record in this area is poor. I know that I do not feel qualified to make those kinds of decisions. The way I see it, human beings are the most successful invasive species on the planet, and we have done a very thorough job of infesting the place. Should we try eradicating ourselves? Sounds stupid doesn't it.

I bring this up because it seems that 99% of the people involved in the invasive mussel issue have already moved past this larger issue and are focused with a single mind on preventing and eradicating the bivalves. When I step back from the lake closures and high-pressure washes, I wonder if the money and effort couldn't be better spent on something else.

Need evidence that the fear may be misguided? After reading dozens of articles about Dreissena mussels, I have only found one instance where a municipal water supply was interrupted by mussels. That was in the early 90's, and the interruption lasted two days. If a human being ever died as a result of quaggas clogging the pipes, I'm sure we would have heard about it. It hasn't happened.

So the water districts are tapping the emergency budgets, and ramping up ranger overtime in response. Recreational fishing is getting a kick to the groin, and all for what? To save a few bucks on the water bill? To "save" lakes that are populated with nothing but introduced species? To keep stinky mussel shells off the shore of a few swim beaches? Or just because we should hate species that are good at reproducing fast and spreading on the pontoon boats that man created and drove across the country?

As the dollars spent in response to the "threat" add up, I am beginning to think of all the things those dollars could be going toward. How about a half-million in fish habitiat, or a million dollars in fishing access projects? Why not spend a quarter on more trout, and another two-mil on enforcement? OK, issue a million dollar bounty for the person who figures out how to keep the pipes clean. I bet we'd spend it on the half-horse half-zebras.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

A Tale of Two Quaggas [View all] , swimbait, Mon Apr-21-08 11:42 PM
  RE: A Tale of Two Quaggas, Nico, Apr 22nd 2008, #1
RE: A Tale of Two Quaggas, swimbait, Apr 22nd 2008, #2
      RE: A Tale of Two Quaggas, offduty, Apr 22nd 2008, #3

Top Calfishing.com Calfishing.com Main Board topic #4960 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+
© Copyright Robert Belloni 1997-2012. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without express written consent.