> From: Jay DeLong <thirdwind_at_att.net>
> To: NANFA <nanfa_at_aquaria.net>
> Subject: RE: NANFA-- Olympic Mudminnows???
> Date: Friday, November 26, 1999 5:06 PM
> Shireen, that's really not always the case. At the NANFA convention, a
> representative from Illinois DNR was invited to talk about regulations on
> collecting fish in his state. It was obvious to everyone there,
> the DNR guy, that the laws were ludicrous. They were written in another
> era. Even today you see terms like "rough fish" and "bait fish" that are
> holdovers from a past era. These terms were developed to manage fish for
> harvest (e.g., rough fish vs. game fish) and not to protect the fish
> themselves. Fish have historically been treated as a harvestable
> I shared a specific example of the Olympic mudminnow to illustrate a real
> life situation. State DNRs do not have the mandate to protect species
> same way the USFWS does. There are many cases where a species clearly in
> need of protection doesn't receive it until the USFWS makes some noise
> they'll do it. Or a state will declare a species threatened or
> yet fail to protect it from development or other human impacts. Or they
> protect all fish from being collected for home aquaria to make
> less complicated, like in my state.
> In some states, laws that make it on the books stay on the books if they
> aren't challenged or if they don't cause any problems. An example I
> from the Illinois regs talk was that it is legal to collect a bowfin for
> home aquaria providing the collecting gear is a gaff or bow and arrow.
> someone else help me with this if I'm wrong-- I think I remember that in
> Illinois, darters are considered a game fish because the term "percid"
> used on the books to describe yellow perch, walleyes, etc. But darters
> aren't listed in the fishing regulations, so legally they aren't a
> harvestable game fish, but they aren't included in the bait fish
> because they are percids, so therefore can't legally be collected, even
> though some darters are much more common that some of the "bait fish"
> are easily collected.
> So if we don't compliment state regulators, it's because they're supposed
> know more than the general public, and they are supposed to do a good
> It's what we pay taxes for. I never go into my grocery store and
> the employees for stocking the shelves so nicely, but I'm going to
> if they do it wrong! :-)
> I sure agree with Shireen about how some people treat the federal
> government. Next time you hear someone complain about "big government"
> remind them how the Endangered Species Act has saved many "little fish".
> Jay DeLong
> Olympia, WA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanfa_at_aquaria.net On Behalf
> Of Shireen Gonzaga
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 1999 1:25 PM
> To: nanfa_at_aquaria.net
> Subject: Re: FW: NANFA-- Olympic Mudminnows???
> someone said:
> > These laws apply to all wildlife in
> > the state. No one ever said that nongame fish specifically could
> > be removed from the state. But they got lumped in with bighorn sheep
> > and bald eagles and such, and the laws have stayed on the books for
> > The people at WDFW are not open to discussion on it. Or rather, the
> > people who are sympathetic don't have any clout. Hopefully with time
> > things will change.
> someone else said:
> > Maybe the only way to get things changed is for native fish
> > to join forces with reptile hobbyists, aviculturalisats and others to
> > legislative changes and simply go over the heads of the wildlife
> people if
> > they are not open to discussion. Unless we now live in a totalitarian
> > these agencies must still comply with the rulings of an elected
> These wildlife agencies are not made of arrogant dolts who routinely defy
> common sense. State and federal wildlife agencies, along with all
> that produce intangible long-term benefits, are chronically underfunded
> politically under-represented. So if they have policies that don't make
> well, that makes sense.
> Almost everytime these government and state agencies are mentioned on
> list, it always seems to be in bash mode. I guess few notice the good
> they do. Having volunteered at a wildlife refuge, and having had a chance
> follow some mid-Atlantic states trying to work together on a particular
> fisheries issue, I've come away feeling sympathetic towards these
> Sure, there are some bizarre regulations out there, and some of these
> don't have the best of people skills. So they piss you off. But look at
> big picture. On the whole, they're doing pretty good.
> By all means, *do* lobby your legislators. But when doing so, don't
> to praise the good work that has already been done by these agencies.
> need our support as well as our criticism.
> - shireen
-- > /"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily > / reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes > / Association" > / This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association > / nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word > / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to > / nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to > / nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead. > / For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org
/----------------------------------------------------------------------------- /"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily / reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes / Association" / This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association / nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to / nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to / nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead. / For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org