As you may have read on the May 4 outdoors page, a breeding population of the dreaded northern snakehead fish was recently discovered in Lee County, Arkansas.
Obviously, this is bad news. But it may not be nearly as bad as some people think.
Since the northern snakehead was discovered in the United States back during the 1990s, myths and misconceptions about the fish have spread much faster than the fish themselves.
I’ve heard people say snakeheads can walk great distances to find new homes once they’ve eaten all of the fish from their original host reservoir. I’ve heard people say it’s unsafe to swim in a pond that’s inhabited by snakeheads because they will attack humans.
None of that stuff is true. It’s just exaggerated garbage that gets blown farther and farther out of proportion every time a story is passed from one person to another.
It’s true, northern snakeheads can survive for brief periods out of water. In fact, according to reports from the Arkansas Game & Fish Commission, that’s how this particular population was discovered. A farmer actually noticed one wiggling along a gravel road near a ditch.
“Wiggling” is a much more accurate assessment of what the fish can do out of water. They don’t have legs, so they don’t actually walk. You won’t see one jogging along the shoulder of I-40, and you certainly don’t have to worry about one walking up your driveway, ringing your doorbell and attacking you when you open the door.
As far as I know, there is no record of a northern snakehead having ever attacked a swimmer in the United States.
I’m sure humans have been bitten by snakeheads. But it was probably during the hook-removal process after the snakehead was landed by a fisherman - and that’s nothing new for anglers in the Mid-South.
The same thing can happen easily with gar, bowfin or even trout. We’ve been catching those fish - and swimming in waters loaded with them - for years, and we’ve never had any problems.
The difference with snakeheads is that they’re relatively new to us. They made their way into the U.S. from Asia sometime during the early 1990s when some brain donor brought them in for sale in the aquarium trade. When that happens with an exotic fish species, it will almost always make its way into the wild at some point.
It’s been happening for years with fish like Oscars and pacus. The difference is “Oscars” and “pacus” don’t sound nearly as menacing as snakeheads.
Be honest. If they were called rabbitheads, do you think they’d still be as feared as they are now?
Don’t get me wrong. Just because these fish have overblown reputations doesn’t mean they aren’t dangerous. If they escape into the major reservoirs of Arkansas, they could do immense damage to native fish populations like crappie, bass and bluegill.
For that reason, anyone who finds a northern snakehead in Arkansas is asked to call the AGFC regional office in Brinkley at (877) 734-4581 or the Fisheries Division in the Little Rock Office at (501) 223-6428.
They do pose some major dangers.
But no matter what you’ve heard, they’re not gonna come running up to bite you on your next family outing.
in The Great Outdoors
Responses to “Snakehead fish…Are they really that bad?”
May 21st, 2008 at 7:19 pm
There are literally hundreds of “alien” species of fish now in Florida waterways. There are also a lot of “alien” reptile species there too. Many other states and countries are experiencing the same thing. Feral cats and the cane toad in Australia, for another example.
When introduced, animals will spread to the limits of their ecological range depending primarily on temperature, food supply and where that species can find its niche among indigenous species.
Natural barriers like mountain ranges, rivers, and oceans that served to control the spread of species and therefore evolution for millions of years are no longer a limiting factor in modern times.
We will continue to see the introduction and spread of “alien” species in all parts of the world as the impact of human civilization becomes the most important driving force in the progess of evolution. The “indirect impact” caused by human driven evolutionary variables like global warming, habitat destruction, etc. will also play a major part as time goes on.
Might as well get used to it since the best efforts of biologists and enviornmentalists will only slow the changes not prevent them.
May 27th, 2008 at 9:13 am
WELL, ART’S REPLY WAS SPECULATION AT BEST, I DON’T BELIEVE IN THE EVOLUTION THEORY, OR HIS HYPOTHESIS OF GLOBAL WARMING, BUT HIS WHATEVER WILL BE, WILL BE UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
ARGUMENT MAY HOLD SOME WATER.
May 28th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Charles:
I found your reply really interesting and would like to get back to you with some ideas.
You said that my post was “SPECULATION AT BEST”. I wish it was. Unfortunately the damage done by the Cane Toad that was imported from South America into Australia is well known in that country. The threat to many areas in the Everglades in Florida from the Melaleuca Tree that was once found only in Australia is real. Fire ants, Africanized bees in the Southeastern US, etc……………just call the departments of natural resources in any state you wish and ask them about their problems with introduced species and unfortunately you will discover my statement is no speculation at all.
Again, what you call my “hypothesis” about global warming is accepted by 99% of all reputable scientists on the planet. The only argument they have is that a small minority accept global warming but are not convinced that humans are the main driving force. They still believe it is possibly a natural cycle, or there are changes in the sun’s radiation, etc., but they still concede that global warming is happening since the global thermometer takes temperatures, not opinions.
You do not believe that evolution is responsible for the existence of man (I am not really convinced about that either). That is fine but in the broadest sense of the word “evolution” which means things change because of forces applied to them (which is not under dispute in either scientific or religious circles), my “hypothesis” still has very strong grounds. As I mentioned before, the limiting factors that kept species confined to specific areas for a long time, like a mountain range some animals could not cross, or the vast ocean surrounding a whole continent like Australia no longer contain animal species.
Airplanes, ships, cars , etc plus man’s natural penchant for “improving” things by importing species to “control” other species, or our innate emotional attachment to animals that drives us to own “pets” of all kinds simply means animal species have and will continue to spread to areas once completely unavailable to them. When that happens, they have a chance to get established.
Even if you do not subscribe to human-driven global warming, species of plants and animals will continue to spread beyond these long established natural boundaries. This continued artificial migration will alter the face of flora and fauna in many places around the world, no matter what we try to do to stop it. We can slow it down, but over the next few hundred years I believe that the “natural” face of this planet will look much different than it does now. We are in a period where those changes, not necessarily bad in the long run, are just getting started.
What you think?
May 28th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Interesting. I am curious what “natural face” of this planet you are so concerned about? Is it the one that exists now? How about the one just a mere thousand years ago during the Little Ice Age” Dare we go back farther in geologic time and consider the natural face of the earth when it was an iceball or a green ocean? Which one? The point is that the earth changes. It always has, and will so long as it exists. Certainly, humans have made some impact upon it. But so have termites (jsut researh the impact of African termites on their locales and you’ll get my point). Humans come from the earth. Thus, they are natural. So how is it that the changes made by humans are not natural?
Global Warming…that great hullabaloo. If the world is warming, how come there has been no warming for the past decade either by ground or satellite measurement? Care to explain that one? How is it the the most recent climate models (which are still pathetic) predict no increase in temperature for the foreseeable future? What happened to global warming? Shoudl be frightened of global cooling, as was the case in the 1970’s? Global warming is a scientific theory. It is not a scientific fact. Anyone who understands the basics of the scientific method understands that. Just because a lot of scientists think it is right does not mean it is so. Remember, a lot of scientists thought that the earth was the center of the universe at one point in history. The simple fact is we know more about the geologic make up of the moon than we do about our own climate. Should we research our climate? Yes. Should we not release poisons into it? Yes. Should we be worried about global warming and wreck the global economy to deter an unproven theory? No.
As for artificial migration, you have a point. But nevertheless, geologic history shows us that animals and plants will migrate without us. Certainly not in the same period of time, but it does happen.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Between catching up on work after surgery and covering some really good baseball at AutoZone Park, I haven’t had much time to spend on the blogs lately.
But Charles and Art, it looks like you’ve been carrying on a pretty good conversation for me.
Art, I think you kind of missed the point of my original post.
All I was saying is that some of the crazy stuff you may have heard about snakehead fish simply isn’t true. They’re bad news, but they’re not science fiction characters.
There’s no doubt that many alien species have harmed native species all over our country. One glowing example you left out is Asian carp. They were brought to this region by humans, and now they’ve taken hold in lakes all over the country.
We can debate evolution and global warming at another time.
For now, all I want to say is this: Snakeheads don’t walk down the interstate looking for new homes. Much of what you’ve heard about them has been exaggerated.
Can we all agree on that, at least?
May 28th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Bryan
Actually I am very familiar with a variety of snakehead species so I did not need to get the point of your column but was happy to see you point out the misconceptions the general public may have. It just triggered a similar idea in my mind that the same type of misinformation that leads to misconceptions like this also lead to the, in my opinion, erroneous idea that we can actually do anything about it in the long run expect slow down this type of development (which is happening globally).
I left out a ton of glowing examples besides the Asian Grass carp, which was supposed to be rendered safe by changing it so it could not reproduce (they call it triploid). The best laid plans of mice and men…..and biologists often go astray! Some might suggest that the common sparrow (which, is also not indigenous to the U.S.) is a less harmful, but just as annoying an example. (If the brown trout had not been so successful……oh, well!)
I have in fact been mulling over the idea of writing a book about the very subject of our changing planet and how modern life and changing environmental and economic factors are shaping evolution and accelerating it. I believe not too distant future generations will see a much different natural world than we do today. I think based on what we know right now, we may be able to predict a large part of what is to come. That would be the purpose of the book.
If nothing else, my comments evoked a lively discussion with Charles and Wayne. Perhaps a thoroughly researched and documented book would do the same on a much larger scale. (A preponderance of the evidence will refute much of the thinking of people like Wayne, I believe).
As a writer, you think I should take on such a daunting task (Origin of The Species, The Sequel)?
May 28th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Art,
One way or another, we certainly generated some good conversation. That’s what blogs are supposed to be for, but a lot of them don’t end up that way.
I think a book on this subject would be a great idea. I know I’d read it. So would anyone else who has ever been hit in the head by a flying Asian carp.
When I first moved here, I thought those things were pretty cool. Now they’re just bothersome.
Keep in touch, BB
May 28th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
I will keep in touch.
I will be semi-retiring early next year and am getting serious about the book. (I have written for a number of publications over the years). You will get an autographed copy gratis for your encouragement.
Art
May 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I agree with Wayne’s post. It was an excellent reply. Art’s quote about “99% of all reputable scientists on the planet belive in global warming and evolution”, can not be proven. While Bryan is singing “Kumbaya” and trying to get everyone to agree, the fact remains that evolution and global warming has not been proven. 98% of intelligent people agree with that. 2% will believe anything. Art, if you’re going to be a writer, you better write fiction novels because you can not prove the theories you are expounding, and remember a man convinced
against his will is of the same opinion still.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Kumbaya? isn’t that a form of egg plant?
Charles, I didn’t mention high gas prices in my original post or the crack in Big Brown’s hoof. I didn’t say anything about Chipper Jones’ bid to hit .400 this season. If we’re opening up the floor here, let’s really, really open it up.
and let’s all try to end our posts with a lil poem like that.
Really adds a lot
Again, My original point: A lot of stuff about snakehead fish has been exaggerated.
How we made it from that to global warming to 98 percent and 2 percent and novels and evolution, I’m really not sure.
But by all means, let’s keep right on ramblin
May 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Wayne
I have been a freelance writer for over thirty years in my spare time and have been published often, so I do not want to write this book to become a writer. I want to write this book to overcome the misconceptions people like you have on this entire subject. The evidence is overwhelming and should be presented.
I am not one to argue. People can believe what they want, and they often do in the face of an extraordinary amount of contrary data.
Would it not be better to write the book and be proven wrong (that would be just fine with me), or to write the book and be right and hopefully open up the eyes of many people to whom this is mostly an emotional issue?
To me the most important thing is not “who” is right, but discovering “what” is right.People like us thinking about it and talking it through is a great way to get there.
And remember “A mind is a terrible thing to waste”
May 30th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Okay, Bryan…to educate you, the song means “Peace and Coming Together”. I now realize that it was before your time. The Bible says, “Blessed are the peace makers” which is a good character trait. Concerning your original article, I think everyone agrees with it. However, Art’s reply tried to use evolution and global warming as facts; which they are not, as Wayne and I wrote in our earlier reply. The statement at the end of my reply is not a poem eventhough it does rhyme. It is a statement tought by philosophers and journalists as a reminder to young journalists to think before they write. If you want to have a poll, take one right here and see how many people think evolution and global warming is theory or fact. Art may get some people thinking his way once a cow turns into a chicken and a horse turns into a goat. But I don’t see it happenning in our lifetime. As a cowboy philosopher once said, “If you lay down with pigs, you’re going to get muddy”. So I’m going to go take a bath…I’m out of here.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I have looked and looked and looked at your post, Charles, and honestly do not know what to say except thanks for your viewpoint.
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Bryan:
Scrolling through the TV menu yesterday, on the Outdoor Channel I saw a show title that said: “Extreme Arial Bowfishing.” Right, I could not imagine what that was. I had visions of people hovering over the ocean in a helicopter bowfishing for something like sharks.
Turns out some people came up with the idea that they would get in a large aluminum boat with two rear facing seats at the stern. Two bow fishermen would sit in those rear seats while the boat operator ran through some waters full of Asian Carp. When the carp would start leaping the hunters would try to shoot them out of the air. Frankly the segment had a bit of a “Dukes of Hazzard” feel to it considering the enthusiastic hoopin’ and hollerin’ that was going on, but it did make me think how this fit into the concept of my book idea.
Chapter 14 in my new book (early working title is: “Terrahomogeny, a Changing Planet”) might be: “Future Changes in Outdoor Recreation.”
(I just remembered a close fishing buddy of mine who moved here for the Miami area once told me that a large Oscar puts up a great fight on a fly rod. The Oscar originally found only in South America is now abundant in the canals of some parts of Florida).
If they want to engage in a really extreme sport involving Asian Carp they might try water skiing.
June 5th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Art:
I’ve seen people trying to shoot Asian carp with crossbows. All I can say is they’re much more skilled with that weapon than I am. I wouldn’t even bother trying it with a bow. However, I would love to go some place where it’s legal to shoot them with shotguns. They’d make big, nice targets.
In regard to Oscars, I know a lot of people who have been down to fish the Florida Everglades, and they say Oscars put up an awesome fight.
One guy I talked to bought a $240 G-Loomis rod just for that trip. After landing a couple of Oscars on it, he put the rod away for fear they would literally snap it in half. Surprisingly, they kept quite a few of the Oscars and ate them. They said they were really good.
June 5th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
And thanks for the explanation about kumbaya, Charlie.
I actually knew what it was. But believe me, I don’t sing anything out loud.
The Good Lord gave me the singing voice of a writer.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:27 am
yes..snakehead fish is top of food chain in freshwater and it amazing..i am snakehead fish hunter in labuan,malaysia..please visit my blog to see malaysia snakehead fish that i caught.
Loading ...
19 comment.