12-03-2019, 06:49 PM
[quote wormandbobber]Despite the fact that the historical June suckers are no longer because of hybridization, the fish being preserved in Utah Lake are still genetically different because of their isolation within Utah Lake. These fish still do NOT exist anywhere else. To me, that is worthy of protecting.
[/quote]
Correct. In addition, there is no debate that the June suckers are phenotypically different than a Utah sucker you might catch in the Weber or elsewhere. Their mouths point forward and is designed to eat plankton as opposed to downward pointing like almost every other sucker species one would ever encounter.
In biology, different classifications are used to sort and differentiate species. They all have their place, but often disagreement will arise, often based on external agendas. Genotype refers the genetics of the species in question. Many markers can be used to sort out groups and it is a useful tool. It is not infallible though and disagreement still arises. Remember, that two individuals may have the same genes for a certain marker but express them very differently. Next is phenotype. This means how an organism looks on the outside. In this case, June suckers look radically different than generic Utah suckers. For most biologists looking objectively at this situation, this makes them ecologically distinct and worth saving.
It
dens me that BFTers don't feel that way but I've given up trying to convince them otherwise. As far as the June sucker program being a "disaster" and other adjectives, the lake is cleaner than it was and further improvements are ongoing, the habitat is better, and the fishing at UL is better than ever, with mind blowing fish counts on a variety of species. The sucker program is, at minimum, partially responsible for that. I'm happy with the effort. The rest of you can keep whining.
[signature]
[/quote]
Correct. In addition, there is no debate that the June suckers are phenotypically different than a Utah sucker you might catch in the Weber or elsewhere. Their mouths point forward and is designed to eat plankton as opposed to downward pointing like almost every other sucker species one would ever encounter.
In biology, different classifications are used to sort and differentiate species. They all have their place, but often disagreement will arise, often based on external agendas. Genotype refers the genetics of the species in question. Many markers can be used to sort out groups and it is a useful tool. It is not infallible though and disagreement still arises. Remember, that two individuals may have the same genes for a certain marker but express them very differently. Next is phenotype. This means how an organism looks on the outside. In this case, June suckers look radically different than generic Utah suckers. For most biologists looking objectively at this situation, this makes them ecologically distinct and worth saving.
It
dens me that BFTers don't feel that way but I've given up trying to convince them otherwise. As far as the June sucker program being a "disaster" and other adjectives, the lake is cleaner than it was and further improvements are ongoing, the habitat is better, and the fishing at UL is better than ever, with mind blowing fish counts on a variety of species. The sucker program is, at minimum, partially responsible for that. I'm happy with the effort. The rest of you can keep whining.[signature]