Fishing for Pangasianodon??

[Aunukia]

Pangasianodon gigas is a CRITICALLY endangered species, yet I've seen LITERALLY hundreds of photos of smiling westerners (and natives) holding rather large specimens they've caught on 'exotic fishing trips', even on this site . Truly, the evil of Humanity is unbridled! I've also read that there is an effort to both breed them for aquaculture and hybridize them with Pangasius species, thus utterly destroying the stock. How is fishing for these animals even legal? If it truly is, then certainly, this must be THE ONLY critically endangered animal species it is legal to harass or kill in this manner, which utterly confounds me. I mean, it's not like ANY organization would allow Dermochelys coriacea or Dicerorhinus sondaicus to be cultured solely for 'sport hunting' or food later o_O. Not to mention the fact that even if it IS legal, it's undeniably irresponsible. I've also read more than one report that stated that these fish almost always die when caught and stripped of their roe, which makes me wonder how many of these fish survive after release (if, indeed, they even ARE released later). Does anyone have any further information on this 'fishing trip' practice or news about Pangasianodon's recent status and/or treatment in the countries it survives in, in general?

[racoll]

I see no problem with a responsible catch and release program.

It adds valuable data for conservationist scientists to use, much in the same way that shark anglers (in the UK at least) are at the forefront of shark conservation efforts as part of planned tag-release-recapture studies.

Also, are you sure these pictures are all

Pangasianodon gigas

, rather than also fairly "giant" and similar

Pangasius

species?

[Aunukia]

I'm sure the pictures I've seen are of Pangasianodon, yes. They're a pretty distinct fish. I doubt I could confuse them with Pangasius spp. Also, you're completely wrong about your catch and release comment, especially if what I've read about the females dying after being stripped of roe is any indication of how they survive angling, and, as I said, I don't know if it DOES apply to all Pangasianodon caught on hook and line. Also, we're talking critically endangered animals here, not just some fish that's kind of rare. Don't tell me you've never seen a fish die from angling o_O? I've seen it far too many times, unfortunately. The risk is too great. I honestly have to say, I find it difficult to understand people a great deal of the time. To me, leaving something alone that's almost been extirpated by meddling Human hands just makes sense (excluding breeding them for restocking programs, of course). Noone HAS to be fishing for these animals. And, like I said, I don't know all the details of this practice. It could be a lot worse than I have any idea of. And, again, like I said, we don't let people go into Ujung Kulon and stab metal hooks through the faces of the rhinos there, now do we? So why only these fish? It would really be a shame to lose them to something so stupid as hybridization and sport fishing . Jesus, of all the things to cause an extinction. I'll ask my question again; Does anyone here have, with some certainty, any more detailed information on this practice? I've seen pictures ON THIS SITE posted by 'Fishing Adventures Thailand'. And most of the pictures I've seen (maybe all, I don't remember - it's been a few months) of anglers with these fish are from Thailand. Someone here has to know.

[racoll]

especially if what I've read about the females dying after being stripped of roe

effort to ........... hybridize them

Now if this is correct, then no, I wouldn't condone such activities which result in the death of the animal or the loss of species identity.

Sport fishing for these fish (when carried out responsibly) is one of the only ways scientists can keep track of population numbers and monitor the effects of serious threats. Catch-release sport fishing cannot be considered a credible threat to these creatures when compared to large scale damming, irrigation, commercial fishing, pollution and changes to the aquatic trophic structure.

Anglers (at least in the UK) care a great deal about the fish they catch, probably more so than anyone else, and go to great lengths to ensure the fish they catch are released healthy, and that their environment is clean and maintained. It is anglers in the UK who pay (via their rod licences) for restoration work on our rivers.

Now, I only speak for anglers in my country, as I know that many other countries have a far less progressive view of their fish and fisheries.

[Birger]

Now, I only speak for anglers in my country, as I know that many other countries have a far less progressive view of their fish and fisheries.

It is becoming much the same here in Canada and if responsibility is not taken than we will lose our fisheries, but it is taking a while to lose the wild west thinking of it is our right to just take what we want.

To me, leaving something alone that's almost been extirpated by meddling Human hands just makes sense (excluding breeding them for restocking programs, of course)

If you want people to care there has to be something in it for them, and restocking can bring about it's own troubles but that isn't the only place with troubles just look at the plight of the American paddlefish, Polyodon spathula and the list could go on....you could leave a lot of these fish alone but if their environment is not kept up we will lose them anyway.

Noone HAS to be fishing for these animals

The other thing is it is easy to rant about things halfway around the world but you go there and tell that local fisherman his family is to go hungry because you feel sorry for the fish he will have different ideas that is for sure...there has to be programs put in place which take some time to implement, it has taken a long time to implement fishery programs here in my province and it would have taken much longer if people would have to go hungry because of it.

Birger

[worton[pl]]

Hey,

also it is no reason to be so excited about photos. Yup you've probably seen a big fish but it was the same photo on different pages (since it is the biggest fresh water fish ever caught - it is normal).

Second thing is fishing - I am a catfish lover and I like to leave a city at weekend. Go to a country side and spend some time with stick and hook - you never know what you will catch and if I catch something I release it with great effort to not harming my friends ;).

A lot of spiecies are in this situation, there is no reason to PROTECT just one this way. Writing also do nothing.

[Silurus]

I believe angling for P. gigas is done in artificially stocked habitats. I am not aware that wild P. gigas are caught this way.

[Aunukia]

Well, I'm hearing an awful lot of entitlistic opinion, but noone so far has replied with any concrete information (always the way with forums, which is why I don't usually have much use for them...panem et circenses ). Apparently, almost all of you completely ignored the fact that these animals may die when caught in this way (and some percentage of other species always meet their end in this way), not to mention the hybridization efforts, which could be THE MOST catastrophic threat to this species. I do believe these animals were stocked artificially, but I thought I kind of already implied that. The sites I perused did say they were (most, if not all, of them in Thailand). And I don't know if these animals ARE released, as I said before. God, I hate repeating myself. And this is not just a matter of hunger either. Pangasianodon gigas is still taken even though it is illegal to do so in Cambodia, not because the people there are hungry and have no choice (there are PLENTY of fish in the Mekong River - it's one of the largest rivers on Earth), but because of widespread ignorance and anthropocentrism. Indochina is notorious for its lack of concern for the preservation of wildlife (the Indochinese rainforests, for example, are some of the most devastated on Earth) and if any of you responding in the 'we can do whatever we want' vein had bothered with 'research' you would know that your 'fishing is good for these animals' comments are fallacious. The people of Cambodia, and most of the Indochinese peninsula, in fact, save for Singapore, are largely uneducated and still hold the old cosmopolitan beliefs that 1: Humans own everything they see and 2: Anything they kill will always be there - the concept of extinction doesn't even enter their minds. Actually, the main reason this fish is hunted AT ALL in Cambodia (it's main range) is because it's a status symbol to villagers there (it is, of course, also eaten later ), much like Arapaima gigas in the Amazon. Now, this is clearly not acceptable and noone in their right mind would argue that it is. Also, I don't remember seeing ANY evidence that these anglers did anything to inform the authorities of their catches (and the authorities in this region of the world don't really count for much), which utterly nullifies any actual GOOD this practice may have otherwise served (I may be wrong, though, it has been a while since I did the research). The pictures I saw, again, literally hundreds of them, were not all of the same fish; they were all discernable individuals, though some were of the same fish from different angles, and these were obvious. I'm not interested in protecting this one animal to the exclusion of all others. My original post inquired as to why ONLY this critically endangered species was permitted to be treated in this way when no other is, but I should think that if the original post were actually read, instead of skimmed with the intention of responding with pure opinion, this should have been obvious. I also fully realize that damming is a serious risk to this species. Please, in the future I would ask that anyone who intends to respond to this post with nothing but opinion abstain from doing so - or, if you insist on doing so AT LEAST READ MY POSTS BEFORE RESPONDING .

[Jools]

Mod edit: Several opinions removed. Fact: I don't know, but why don't you ask over at Fishing Adventures Thailand?

I know this is an opinion but it might serve a use to you.

Jools

PS Good to see the Megafishes program has sparked some wider interest in this species plight.

[Jools]

AT LEAST READ MY POSTS BEFORE RESPONDING .

I'm not sure there's much call in your third post in this forum for shouting. Perhaps if you could add a carraige return or two to your posts, then us simple folks would be able to read through them more readily?

Jools

[Bas Pels]

As fishkeeper I know how much a fish can be stressed. An example, I got Rhinodoras sp, which were quite carefully netted out of the sellers tank, carefully transported and put into their tank. Still, they needed 60 days to show themselves.

I truly believe angling is even worse. Just ask an angler how often a fis is cought with a scar from previous angling - and Dutch anglers are in a similar situation as UK anglers: they don't take much home, they do restock (funny, restock where nothing is taken, how do the fish disappear??) et cetera. I don't think fish putted back have much chances, in fact I thijnk it is more humane to kill the fish on the spot (and as many anglers would not do this, it would result in a lot less anglers, in my eyes a good thing)

However, I don't know anything about Asian catfish, so I rather stay out of the discussion itself

[MatsP]

Silurus, Heok Hee Ng (google gives 3000+ hits searching for that name, the first couple of pages definitely most of them for our member here - and no, not all are Planet Catfish related), works in the Fish Sciences area - he got his PhD at the Fish Division of Museum of Zoology in Ann Arbor, Michigan, but he is currently working, at Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, and amongst other things, describing new species of catfish. So not only highly knowledgable in the area, but he's also living closer to Pangasid catfishes native habitat than most of us. He has given a very plausible answer as to where these fish are being caught - captive bred stock in ponds/lakes where they are artificially introduced (now, that's another debate, of course).

Almost all members of this forum are definitely against (planned/man-induced) hyrbidization of any fish, for any purposes, and to release such "manmade" fish into natural habitat where it would compete with natural forms would be very irresponsible and definitely not "good".

I'm afraid I can't comment on what forms of sport fishing for large pangasids goes on, or if stripping the wild-caught fish from roe is harming them, so I can't add anything more than my clarifications of the above posts.

--
Mats

[Birger]

Silurus, Heok Hee Ng (google gives 3000+ hits searching for that name, the first couple of pages definitely most of them for our member here - and no, not all are Planet Catfish related), works in the Fish Sciences area - he got his PhD at the Fish Division of Museum of Zoology in Ann Arbor, Michigan, but he is currently working, at Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, and amongst other things, describing new species of catfish. So not only highly knowledgable in the area, but he's also living closer to Pangasid catfishes native habitat than most of us. He has given a very plausible answer as to where these fish are being caught - captive bred stock in ponds/lakes where they are artificially introduced (now, that's another debate, of course).

Yes... I was going to say that when you put down everyone that answered your post you also put down one of the well respected scientists that is doing some work to help these and other Asian fish, he is someone that may have helped you in your quest for definite hard facts, or were you just trolling for an argument and someplace to preach...now is a good time for me to figure out that blocking feature hmmm...

[racoll]

Please, in the future I would ask that anyone who intends to respond to this post with nothing but opinion abstain from doing so - or, if you insist on doing so AT LEAST READ MY POSTS BEFORE RESPONDING

As you have initiated a discussion, every member of this forum has a right to respond whether you think their comments are valid or otherwise. Long-term contributors to this site should not be instructed on whether to reply, especially by a new member with three posts (perhaps a reason to keep the post count Jools). New member or not, you do raise interesting points though, but the inflammatory tone is not appreciated.

I'm sure you are aware, but this is not an angling website. We keep fish in tanks. Some of us also catch fish, but others do not approve of this, as you have read.

Well, I'm hearing an awful lot of entitlistic opinion, but noone so far has replied with any concrete information (always the way with forums, which is why I don't usually have much use for them...panem et circenses ). Apparently, almost all of you completely ignored the fact that these animals may die when caught in this way (and some percentage of other species always meet their end in this way),

Hmmm. You criticise the forum for not providing information, only opinion, and then in the next sentence you give totally unsubstantiated opinion. We would also like facts. Your references to articles in the literature or even first hand anecdotal evidence would be appreciated.

Also, I don't remember seeing ANY evidence that these anglers did anything to inform the authorities of their catches (and the authorities in this region of the world don't really count for much), which utterly nullifies any actual GOOD this practice may have otherwise served

Neither do I , which is why I said "I see no problem with a responsible catch and release program"

This is my stance. I have not once said I approve of any of the practices you allude to that actually might be going on in the region. If a lot of what you say is true, then no, I do not approve of most of it. Until facts are presented, it remains in the realm of speculation, where one person's opinion is as valid as another's.

[apistomaster]

Can't resist poking my nose into this one.
The National Geographic Channel runs a piece on catching monster fish, including the Pangasiodon from the Mekong River.
They show them being caught with nets stretched bank to bank by village fishermen but I am aware they are also caught by sport fishermen used rod and reel methods. The latter at least gives a fish a chance to escape. The economic value, according to the Nat Geo Channel's program, of one large specimen is more than an annual income of a typical villager. The method used is never intended to permit fish's survival because they can not sell a released fish. Sport fishermen may be practicing some catch and release but I am of the opinion this fish does not lend itself very well to standard catch and release fishing as the fish are played on tackle designed for a prolonged fight and fish played to the point of exhaustion do not generally have a good survival rate after release. There is also a matter of identification. I am not certain the net fishermen fishing for the Giant Mekong Catfish are catching the same species. My guess is they are catching another large Pangasiad species.
They real threat to the Mekong Catfish is the construction of hydroelectric dams across the Mekong. These do not allow proper migratory spawning runs to occur. It appears to me that the fish are already doomed because of development and because populations of breeding size fish have already dipped below a critical number needed for replacement reproduction. From what I can tell, only a very ambitious program by the Cambodian and Thai Governments stand any chance of preserving the big Catfish and there are few precedents of any truly successful program that has been able to bring a very large species back from the brink of extinction once the natural conditions for normal reproduction has been effectively lost.
I think it is too little and too late to save the Giant Mekong Catfish and all that is left for us on the outside to do is regret it.

In general, a managed sport fishery can be expected to be reasonably successful if the species numbers and ability to reproduce has not been too severely damaged . In North America we have the huge White Sturgeon of the Columbia River and it's major tributary, the Snake River, that was in jeopardy due to hydroelectric dam construction and over harvesting by sport fishermen. Fortunately, the species was left enough wild sections of these rivers to continue spawning and a catch and release program was implemented in time and sufficiently enforced such that the species is not endangered. Attempts to save the Paddlefish have been much less successful.
We devastated our wild salmon and Steelhead runs and attempted to artificially replace them with homogenized hatchery fish not well adapted for any particular home river system. All wild fish must be released and all hatchery fish may be identified by the clipped off adipose fin and are considered literally, fair game. The Salmonids sustain heavy losses during their years at sea from general commercial fishing outside of US Territorial waters. The wild fish are just hanging on marginally but they are hanging on. This is in spite of the fact they are being caught and released. Some fish can handle this much better than others and the Sturgeon and Salmonids fair pretty well in this respect. The loss rates among released fish caused by any injuries sustained during being caught and released are between 1% and 2%. Wild resident Trout populations managed this way have returned to their former numbers wherever their habit remained intact. Among the resident wild Trout, the death rate due to natural causes, across all age classes present, are about 50% per annum. The 1-2% of deaths among released fish is a mere blip.

[Guanlong_wucaii]

especially if what I've read about the females dying after being stripped of roe

effort to ........... hybridize them

Now if this is correct, then no, I wouldn't condone such activities which result in the death of the animal or the loss of species identity.

Sport fishing for these fish (when carried out responsibly) is one of the only ways scientists can keep track of population numbers and monitor the effects of serious threats. Catch-release sport fishing cannot be considered a credible threat to these creatures when compared to large scale damming, irrigation, commercial fishing, pollution and changes to the aquatic trophic structure.

Anglers (at least in the UK) care a great deal about the fish they catch, probably more so than anyone else, and go to great lengths to ensure the fish they catch are released healthy, and that their environment is clean and maintained. It is anglers in the UK who pay (via their rod licences) for restoration work on our rivers.

Now, I only speak for anglers in my country, as I know that many other countries have a far less progressive view of their fish and fisheries.

Racoll, I think the people of Thailand pledged to try not to catch the Giant Catfish. And I find catch & release OK, just that the fish looks a bit odd after that... But I'm sure they don't mind!