A blog about Technology, Schools & Education, and Family & Home.
Real Name: Chris George Member Since: March 14, 2006 Last Signed In: November 15, 2008 Profile Views: 1827 Blog Views: 2438 Sara Lievanos, Freedom Middle Madison Pinheiro, Downtown Ezekiel Chacon, Colonel Nichols Carissas Guerrero, Siebert School Parker Taylor, Endeavour Elementary Jose Campos, Munsey School Joaquin Cardenas, William Penn Lena Claire Wilson, Stokdale Elementary Breeanna Parish, Fred L. Thompson Isaac Meyer, Norris Middle School June 06 July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 December 08 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
Piranha caught in local lake
This was sent in by alert reader Curt Dalton. Ever catch anything unusual around here?
Hi Dianne: You're probably not interested in this, but I thought I would send it to you anyway. This is a photo of a piranha caught in a local lake. The photo was taken by my father-in-law, retired Kern County Fire Captain Jim McCullough and shows a piranha in the bottom of a five gallon plastic bucket. Do you know if anyone else has ever encountered an exotic species in the wild here in Kern County? Curt Dalton 26 comments from 14 users
1
posted by
salazarbruce01
on Jul 7, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Can u tell us which local lake???
posted by
pgillet
on Jul 7, 2007 at 02:23 PM
That fish looks like a Pacu, which is sold for use in aquariums at many fish stores. They grow large and grow very fast. They often outgrow most tanks under 100 gallons. I heard of several caught in lakes in San Diego. I would presume that someone let this fish go in the lake.
posted by
sagefever
on Jul 7, 2007 at 04:15 PM
Pacu~square straight teeth,and an overbite.Piranh have sharp pointy teeth, underbite.So say Wikipedia
posted by
CurtDalton
on Jul 7, 2007 at 05:23 PM
I understand this fish had SHARP pointed teeth.
I sent the link to this blog to my father-in-law and his reply was: "One of the readers thought this was a Pacu .......... not! ............ I saw the teeth on this sucker." My father in-law is very knowledgeable in fish and wildlife. If he says it was a piranha, I believe him.Actually, it doesn't really matter to me because I have no intention whatsoever of swimming in any of the local lakes. (Yuck!)
On a side note, I sure hope no one goes skinny-dipping! OUCH! posted by
sagefever
on Jul 7, 2007 at 08:24 PM
Then Tell!!! which lake and should not Fish and game be alerted?
posted by
JustAThought
on Jul 7, 2007 at 08:59 PM
I am sure I have seen them in the River Walks Lake.
posted by
coochee
on Jul 8, 2007 at 01:17 AM
Seriously, if this is a pirhanna, and it was caught in a local lake, it needs to be reported, so like, maybe people wont die from his friends that may still be in there.....I'm sure a very heroic and responsible fire captain who knows fish, already did this, right?
posted by
siouxcityranch
on Jul 8, 2007 at 08:47 AM
I agree at the very least we would want to preserve our native fish from being destroyed by this alien. Remember the frogs imported to Australia that took over the native habitat? This is why we have Fish and Game laws. I believe that this Fire Capt. has a DUTY to report where and when this fish was caught to the Fish & Game Department.
posted by
steveeswenson
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:57 AM
Has this fish been reported to Fish and Game? And I agree, we need the name of the local lake. posted by
CurtDalton
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:57 AM
Let me clear up a few things… First, I didn’t submit this photo for publication. It was submitted to a specific person at the Bakersfield Californian with a question and it was posted to this blog by another person. I’m not the least bit mad it got posted, but I honestly expected a simple reply to my question or perhaps it would spark an inquiry or investigationby the Californian for a possible news story on non-native species. I didn’t expect it to be posted to this blog. For the record: My father-in-law (from The fish was caught by a neighbor of his father-in-law and it was photographed as the neighbor was unloading the fish & fishing gear from his vehicle. The fishermen were (I believe) Spanish-speaking and related they caught it in a local lake. Whether through mis-communication or a language barrier, the name of the lake lost and my father-in-law cannot remember which lake the fish was taken from…The lake was either Ming lake or A writer above stated a retired fire captain from out of town had "duty" to report this fish. I find this disturbing on several levels: Does a retired lawyer have a "duty" to represent a criminal? Of course not! Using that rationale, every retired carpenter has a "duty" to give advise on the afterlife! Lets explore who actually has responsibility for reporting or investigating this non-native fish… The fisherman who caught it certainly has a responsibility to report this non-native species, However, the Game Warden has the responsibility for oversight of all those who fish in our local waters. This includes knowing the license status of the fisherman, the bag limit (or the number of fish the fisherman is lawfully able to take ) and whether there are non-native species in the lakes and streams. It could very well be these fishermen were un-licensed and that's why they didn't report it. I dunno. The Department of Fish and Game biologists are responsible for knowing exactly what is in our lakes, rivers, streams and forests and whether any non-native species are present and if so, whether they pose a danger to the general public. They are employed for this specific duty and therefore the ultimate responsibility rests with them. If they don't know what is in our local lakes,streams and rivers, they need to either be re-trained or fired. Again, I’m not upset my e-mail got published. My Bad. Next time I don’t want something published, I will state it in the beginning of my e-mail and avoid tempest-in-a-teapot situations like this. posted by
sagefever
on Jul 9, 2007 at 09:14 AM
No tempest ,at least on my part.As to duty,well just as a human being,I would fell really bad if someone was seriously hurt..so I'd call and say what you outlined above..while the legal responsibilities are as you describe,the ethical ones seem clear enough to me..but I am just describing what I feel is ethical~you do whatever floats your boat(just be very careful sticking your hands into the water).This is how non-native species get into our water/land.The budgets for Fish and Game,state biologists are not what they should be,those lands and waterways are our responsibility,they belong to us.
posted by
OldBlue56
on Jul 9, 2007 at 09:16 AM
I'm with you Curt. My father in law's neighbor took a picture of Big Foot last week while vacationing in Canada. As soon as he forwards the picture to me, I'll post it here.
posted by
CurtDalton
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:09 AM
OldBlue56 ---
Cool, Can't wait to see it!
sagefever---
I too would feel bad if someone were hurt by a non-native species in one of our local lakes. However, absent specific information to relate to the Department of Fish & Game such as who, what, when and where, there is nothing to report except the fish was caught in a local lake.
My father-in-law is a retired Kern County Fire Captain now living in Northern California. Whether the fisherman who caught the fish actually lives in the house next door to his father-in-law isn't known. He could have simply been dropping off his fishing buddy or over there to show off his catch. I would suspect he actually lives there but the fact remains I wasn't there so I don't know for certain. My father-in-law WAS there and since he lives in Northern California he doesn't know either. He passed this on to me to show me something interesting.
The Department of Fish and Game is funded, in large measure, by the revenue generated by hunting and fishing licenses.As a former hunter, I personally believe the decline in revenue supplied to DFG is a result of the politically-correct firearm/hunter haters who would be perfectly happy if no one hunted or fished on public (or private) lands - EVER.
The truth of the matter is hunting and fishing are essential tools for responsible game management. Without it, species have no population control whatsoever and are liable to over-populate an area to the point where there is no food to support the game animal population and starvation ensues. If the DFG budgets are not adequate, the public needs to lobby the politicians to ensure they have a budget that allows them to do their job (find non-native species).
However, by and large, the general public NEVER thinks about game management or the Department of Fish and Game. The only ones who DO think about the DFG are the responsible hunters and fishermen who buy licenses to support their sport and we all know how popular hunters are in California! (NOT!)
While Bambi is cute, Bambi will starve to death if there is no responsible game management and hunting to control the herd population. This has been proved time and time again. In fact, the last time I looked at the statistics ( admittedly a few years ago) there were MORE deer in the Continental United States now than there were in the late 1800's and early 1900's . posted by
JenFord
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:32 AM
I'm just curious as to how long ago was it found. Was it caught recently? I would never allow my family to go into our disgusting lakes but I have friends that do. I just worry for their safety. posted by
OldBlue56
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:39 AM
I just had a thought. If piranha were introduced into the lower Kern River, they could just eat the morons who drown during the summer, and save the KCSO Search and Rescue all the trouble and expence of recovering the bodies...
posted by
pamg
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:42 AM
If you go online and look up photos of both piranha and pacu, this little guy definitely has the look and the coloring of a pacu. He doesn't look anything like a piranha.
posted by
tja2fordsters
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:46 AM
I can't imagine this is for real... but if it is we definitely need to know more!!!
posted by
JenFord
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:12 AM
If it had pointed teeth, it doesn't matter if it looks like a Pacu or not! posted by
pamg
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:35 AM
I'm not convinced that it DID have pointed teeth. Just 'cause one guy said so, doesn't make it so.
posted by
CurtDalton
on Jul 10, 2007 at 07:42 AM
Pamg--
You wrote; "I'm not convinced that it DID have pointed teeth. Just 'cause one guy said so, doesn't make it so". Yeah, the guy who was there doesn't know as much as you do! - Do you by chance believe in UFO's or are you related to Paris Hilton?
Everyone Else - My father-in-law advised me the fisherman assured him the catch was reported to the proper authorities. posted by
CurtDalton
on Jul 10, 2007 at 07:44 AM
JenFord - The photo of the Piranha you posted is great. That sucker is HUGE, - one of the biggest I have ever seen! (BTW, my father-in-law took the photo in the first week of July) posted by
steveeswenson
on Jul 10, 2007 at 09:28 AM
I finally got through to a Fish and Game biologist (only took two days). He's checking this out for me right now. I'll let you know as soon as I find out.He did not know of such a report but he said he's been on another project and might not have been informed if there was such a report. So stay tuned. posted by
sagefever
on Jul 10, 2007 at 09:40 AM
Good to know Steve.That fish looks more Pacu to me(they eat vegetation, small critters not bigger mammals like the piranha) but with all the variations in a specie,it is hard to tell.The bottom fin(basil?) looks akin to the pacu also..but even a sign posted saying pacu not piranha might save a heart attack or too.I am all for hunting,being a farmers daughter the values in hunting were instilled early,plus the mom's side all being huge fishing,hunting fiends1
posted by
steveeswenson
on Jul 10, 2007 at 12:12 PM
The Fish and Game have no reports of a piranha being found in a Kern County lake, F&G biologist Kenneth Johnson in the Fresno office said.He couldn't tell what the fish was in the picture. He checked with the Kern County warden and was told about once every other year, the F&G gets a report of a pirahna, but it turns out to be a pacu. But it could be a pirahna if someone had one and dumped it in the lake. The good news is it won't survive or reproduce because the water is too cold here in the winter. So that leaves the possibility that it might be a pirahna. But Johnson knows of no confirmed pirahna being found in Kern County. If a fish swims at you, kick hard. posted by
frankmagallanes
on Aug 2, 2007 at 06:32 PM
My name is Frank Magallanes, I do research on piranhas. Those that may know me or heard of me will have no trouble accepting my ID of the fish shown. That is a pacu NOT A PIRANHA. The fish in the photo is a member of genus Piaractus. Nothing against the father who did the initial ID. But he is wrong.
Cheers, Frank, opefe.com posted by
TURCKERMAMA
on Feb 12, 2008 at 03:19 AM
pacu's are common in the lakes of the united states.. dont be freakin out on this its not going to kill u if it did they wouldnt be sold nation wide in stores like WALMART! LMFAO PLEASE PEOPLE GET A HOLD OF UR SELFS....c'mon dont be pathetic if u go to any pet shop with that pic they will tell u its a PACU.... a red belly pacu...ive had dozens of them....geeesh....freshaquarium.about.com/library/weekly/aa101199.h tm
1
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS: Loading Stories
Advertisement |
& nbsp; Red Belly Pacu
Piranha