There’s apparently been quite a panic about the introduction of non-indigenous snakeheads (originally from Asia) to the United States. These beautiful and impressive fish have several properties that are bothersome to many. Firstly, they’re large and carnivorous; when introduced into the US, they have no natural predators. They are aggressive and one species, the Channa micropeltes, even attacks people who approach its young. Furthermore, these fish breathe air — thus can survive outside of water for hours or days — and are excellent jumping fish; thus, any specimens kept must be placed in closed aquariums which interface with the air (kept in a closed aquarium without any air, they will die). Because of the dangers these fish pose to ecosystems they’re not indigenous to, they are yet another case where the State has intervened in and regulated people’s affairs.That these fish have caused so much of a panic for reasons unrelated to the ecosystem is curious. They have large teeth and can survive outside of the water — so what? So do crocodiles and alligators. It is an indisputable fact that no matter how formidable a species may be, man has mastered it and can easily master it. Examples include white sharks, crocodiles, cobras, lions, giant squid, etc. The superior intelligence of humankind gives us an insurmountable advantage over everything else. It is curious that despite the much greater threat that virus’ like HIV and prion diseases pose to us, most people are more afraid of large carnivorous animals. The fact that George Bush can blow up the Earth 10 times over again by pressing a button doesn’t seem to worry most people, but a few “walking” fish with teeth cause a panic, as well as second-rate straight-to-TV movies.
In fact, these fish are interesting from a scientific point of view. It is rare that we see a group of species in a subjectively intermediary evolutionary stage. Of course, all species are evolving; however, we have mentally set various “dividers” — such as water vs. land. These fish most likely have similar characteristics to the first prehistoric fish to have started coming out of the water for brief periods of time. They can survive out of water because they have “half a lung” — a float bladder that also serves as an extra oxygen exchange medium — something which has interesting implications to the evolution / creationist debate (“What good is half a lung?”).
Returning to the issue of the State’s involvement in this issue, it is obvious that State-regulations are not going to solve this “problem”. Indeed, the universal consideration of these fish as a “problem” is flawed. If all water and land was privately owned — as it should be — these fish may be considered beneficial by many owners of various bodies of water. Due to their natural beauty and relative intelligence for fish (they can be trained to eat out of their owner’s hands), they are popular pets. They are also considered a delicacy in various parts of Asia, and have an excellent taste.
The privatization of bodies of water would also allow for more effective responses to individuals improperly disposing of these fish. They are thought to have arisen in the US due to fish-owners disposing of them in lakes and ponds when they’d outgrown their aquariums. Private owners of bodies of water would — if they didn’t want these fish — consider this to be a tort, and would take various measures to punish those who did such. It would be considered no different than polluting someone else’s property with toxic waste. Furthermore, with numerous owners of private bodies of water, various different strategies to deal with these species would be tried, and those most successful could be voluntarily adapted by all. With a free market sector dealing with these fish, the best solutions could be found.
{ 12 comments }
The fishhead can swin out of water and travel across land to another body of water.
Let’s say that I own a 20 acre lake and someone two miles away owns a similar lake containing fishheads. All between us are ponds, some with fishheads and some without. One day a fishhead from the lake two miles away travels to my lake and proceeds to destroy it. How could I ever prove from which lake the fish came? How could I ever realize my due consideration? Let’s also say the fish are travelling all over the ponds so genetic mapping is not an option.
Justin
Justin,
I don’t know. Let’s let the free market figure out solutions. How about property-owners not being able to externalize the cost of protecting their property onto everyone else? Also, how is the State going to make things any better? Nothing the State can do is going to change the fact that these fish are simply excellent survivors. Just like the State hasn’t been able to stop killer bees. Maybe in a free market where someone could make a lot of money by producing a product that would eradicate these fish in bodies of water where it’s placed (e.g., a snakehead-specific parasite or virus). As for proving where fish are coming from, it’s immediately narrowed down by “who owns a lake containing these fish?” With a market for “snakehead”-forensics, these kinds of questions could be answered.
Justin,
Also note that while the fish can survive out of water for hours to days, it needs to have a moist land environment. This suggests possible solutions for containment.
Of course, these fish are the ultimate ichthyo-capitalists. Why intervene into their world–indigenous or otherwise–when they are merely competing in an open market for resources of (re)production?
Blame the Darwinists! This is the fish they’ve been putting on their bumper stickers for years!
It’s finally coming around to bite them on the … ah never mind, enough with the corny jokes.
Paul D.,
Yea, ya know, evolution is a real pain. But it does have its bright spots. Maybe it’s possible that even the socialists and interventionists will one day evolve beyond the Jurassic age?
But there might be several nearby lakes, some with fishheads, some without, and various levels of containment. And if/when my lake gets contaminated, I can contaminate others.
Something akin to this affects Africa. Europe won’t import genetically engineered grain, and our multinationals want to collect a royalty. So if we send such grain to Africa, and some gets planted instead of consumed (in a country where people are starving), the patented gene can make the entire crop subject to royalty and an import ban.
Or do we demand genetic markers of all of these fish so they can be traced so we can enforce the torts?
Lets say the original was a fishhead farm that went out of business when the owner died, but the fish then spread out. Somehow a magical tort system gives perfect knowledge as to the source of the contamination (so I can afford to identify the offender without going bankrupt myself), and I can sue the now bankrupt estate.
Some things are prima facie dangers. This is a different KIND of thing than what we normally consider for commerce. We ought not to build living quarters near toxic chemical plants – we don’t say “well, their survivors can sue later”. Exogenous species are like that. “Killer Bees” ought not to have been moved out of Africa (they could conduct research there). Or should the southern US, Mexico, Central America, and most of South America sue that one person that removed the queen barrier? I’m quite sure he has enough to compensate everyone.
I should be able to hold a vial of small pox if I want to because you (or your survivors) can sue me (or my estate) if I accidentally drop it?
It is different to argue if someone wants to put up a large bond IF the fishheads escape that would cover the cost of containment. But things that can cause mass or exponential damage ought to be treated differently than things which are self-contained. If I have something that can destroy me or my house, v.s. an entire city or ecosystem. Or things that are not easily undone.
tz,
The funny thing is that all of these ecological disasters occured while we have a State — so saying that we should look to States to fix it is nonsense. They haven’t prevented either of these things from occuring, and haven’t done anything to deal with them now that we have them.
Now, maybe there are some things that in an unhampered free market people would be prevented from owning or creating. E.g., nuclear bombs. A nuclear bomb cannot be used for anything except for the initiation of aggression. Now, a nuclear rocket is a different matter, and has potential non-invasive uses: e.g., blowing up an asteroid aiming for the Earth.
Now, is a snakehead to be considered such a dangerous thing that no-one should be allowed to own it? I don’t think so. It is perfectly possible to contain these things, and for the free market to find solutions to any accidental leakage of them from one property to another (e.g., snakehead-specific parasite).
Here’s a simple fact: owning a snakehead does not constitute the initiation of aggression against anyone. And these things can be used for purposes other than the initiation of aggression. I suggest Toward a Universal Libertarian Theory of Gun (Weapon) Control. Block, Walter. Block, Matthew for a discussion of a related issue that is relevant to this one.
Slightly offtopic, my dad caught one of these when we were fishing in the North Channel of Lake Huron, one of the Great Lakes. This was two or three years ago *at least*. It seriously was frightening. The fish was huge, and was grunting and roaring at us as we carried him up to the camp in our net – it was breathing air and was thrashing like a demon. I was sure we’d caught a dinosaur.
But boy, was it TASTY.
Hey Matt,
Maybe those fish only appear to be like the ones from Asia–but are actually mutated monster-fish courtesy of the chemical effluence blobs that come out of Sarnia, Ont.
I grew up about 10 miles downstream from Sarnia, drank river water my entire childhood.
Can’t breathe underwater yet, though.
Omch’Ar, you’re lucky you can still breathe air!
Could be worse: My mom lived in Copper Cliff (just outside of Sudbury) when she was young, right underneath the Inco Superstack, and she still remembers making snow angels in the pink snow.
Go, go, walking fish!!!!
Man… America eaten by a fish… what a way to go for a Superpower…
You guys should be so lucky… these things are so tasty that if ever they got lose here, they would be overfished within weeks.
My friend used to keep one as a guard… i dunno how he did it, but it would snap at anyone except him.
he kept it in an aquarium next to his door at night and actually caught an intruder by the ear.
The police report was hilarious.
It’s huge now and my friend needed to build a pond for it in the front yard. (Shattered three aquariums.) Sometimes it gets bored and takes a walk around the garden scaring first time visitors.
Comments on this entry are closed.