In calculating endangered fish species, should hatchery populations be counted or just wild fish?

Wild

6 of 6

by Adam Smith

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

Hatchery populations should not be counted along with wild fishes when conducting a census of endangered fish species.

I point to the example of the domestic cow for support:

Where are all the wild cows?

Have we, by the process of domestication, actually interfered with the laws of adaption/evolution and irrevocable changed the species?

Have we actually conducted a sort of genocide through domestication?

Anothe r example to support the argument is the wild dog. Would you count the many varied breeds of domestic dog if you were to conduct a census of the wild dogs of Africa?

The very fact that a creature is in captivity is enough to begin the physiological, mental and biological changes that divert the creature(s) from the original species.

The example for this is the Killer Whale. In captivity, their dorsal fins quickly become limp. We know that stress can cause significant physical changes in humans. Could it be that the stress of captivity could cause significant changes to a creature; enough so that it diverts from its species?

Of course. That is why we must only catalog the truly wild numbers of endangered fishes. The fishes in hatcheries have already been tainted and are on their way to becoming something "else."

Learn more about this author, Adam Smith.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.