50 replies to this topic

[gcsnelling]

I believe he meant any kind of infection. Not specific human diseases i.e. viruses, viroids, prions, bacteria, nematodes, arthropods, fungi and other macroparasites.

 

Exactly, it shouldn't take rocket science to understand what I meant.

[Skwiggledork]

Uh... Just look at what happened when we released native Europeans into central America

I don't think native means what you think it means. Europeans are one of the most invasive things on the planet.

[Barristan]

I understand that releasing non-native ants could possibly be bad, but I still don't get why releasing ants, in general, would be bad (even native ones). The article you linked also speaks of exotic animals spreading some disease to native ones:

 

New disease from abandoned foreign snakes threatens Britain's native reptiles

 

Even if the chance of infection was higher in captive ant colonies (I don't see any proof here that this is the case), the bacteria, parasites etc. would still occur in the wild too, they are native as the ants.

 

So, in my opinion, I don't see any problem with releasing ant colonies of native species back to the wild.

Edited by Barristan, May 11 2018 - 3:57 AM.

[Martialis]

 

I believe he meant any kind of infection. Not specific human diseases i.e. viruses, viroids, prions, bacteria, nematodes, arthropods, fungi and other macroparasites.

 

Exactly, it shouldn't take rocket science to understand what I meant.

 

 

Indeed it shouldn't

 

I was ust being pedantic, sorry if I was annoying.

[GeorgeK]

On a serious note here, this is a question that i believe should be answered by biologists/immunologists, and not hobby ant keepers at most. Releasing non-natives should be obviously strictly forbidden unless local eco-system will benefit from that new species, something of which you can read in this article, altho its mostly for plants > https://phys.org/new...ecosystems.html

Now, when it comes to releasing native species to their natural habitat, keep in mind I'm using my whole understanding of immunology to write this (such knowledge, much science ) and bad memes of course. It doesn't really make sense that captive NATIVE species can carry a virus that can be deadly to the ones living in wild (unless you keep your ants in Chernobyl). When you think about it, we keep our ants in mostly "sterile" environment and give them food that usually comes from same "sterile" environment so there isn't really nothing that could cause them to get this new super deadly strain that would be fatal to the colonies living in the wild. What does make sense is, that colonies we release in the wild actually have chance to die off due to lack of any contact with outside world, since they spent their life in "sterile" environment, but then again queen was raised in the wild, so maybe she has immune system that is passed on to her offspring (workers of colony).

All in all, unless you live in Chernobyl, or Russians want to modify your ants with deadly biological weapon to cause utter destruction and downfall of western civilization by killing off your ants, I think its safe to release NATIVE species to their NATIVE habitat where you found them. If you think its okay to release non-native species, then you`re just a muppet.

[gcsnelling]

 

 

I believe he meant any kind of infection. Not specific human diseases i.e. viruses, viroids, prions, bacteria, nematodes, arthropods, fungi and other macroparasites.

 

Exactly, it shouldn't take rocket science to understand what I meant.

 

 

Indeed it shouldn't

 

I was ust being pedantic, sorry if I was annoying.

 

No worries, I was not annoyed although misspelling of "just" Well that just pisses me off.

[Shifty189]

On a serious note here, this is a question that i believe should be answered by biologists/immunologists, and not hobby ant keepers at most. Releasing non-natives should be obviously strictly forbidden unless local eco-system will benefit from that new species, something of which you can read in this article, altho its mostly for plants > https://phys.org/new...ecosystems.html
Now, when it comes to releasing native species to their natural habitat, keep in mind I'm using my whole understanding of immunology to write this (such knowledge, much science ) and bad memes of course. It doesn't really make sense that captive NATIVE species can carry a virus that can be deadly to the ones living in wild (unless you keep your ants in Chernobyl). When you think about it, we keep our ants in mostly "sterile" environment and give them food that usually comes from same "sterile" environment so there isn't really nothing that could cause them to get this new super deadly strain that would be fatal to the colonies living in the wild. What does make sense is, that colonies we release in the wild actually have chance to die off due to lack of any contact with outside world, since they spent their life in "sterile" environment, but then again queen was raised in the wild, so maybe she has immune system that is passed on to her offspring (workers of colony).
All in all, unless you live in Chernobyl, or Russians want to modify your ants with deadly biological weapon to cause utter destruction and downfall of western civilization by killing off your ants, I think its safe to release NATIVE species to their NATIVE habitat where you found them. If you think its okay to release non-native species, then you`re just a muppet.

You put what I was thinking to words perfectly.

The only thing that I would add is that the realeased colony may have a hard time adjusting to life in the wild and possibly die due to not knowing how to forage correctly, or not haveing as large of a range as there wild counterparts

[GeorgeK]

 

You put what I was thinking to words perfectly.

The only thing that I would add is that the realeased colony may have a hard time adjusting to life in the wild and possibly die due to not knowing how to forage correctly, or not haveing as large of a range as there wild counterparts

 

I don't think they wouldn't know how to forage, i just think that abudance of food we give them in their outworld would take much more range as you said to collect, so i guess colony would have to adjust which could mean a certain part of colony dying off due to lack of food for their size

[anttics]

I had planned to realise my native colonies in their habittat. Maybe its a bad idea. Since they won't be able to compete with wild colonies. Unless is close to my house and keep an eye on them onece in a while.

[Shifty189]

I had planned to realise my native colonies in their habittat. Maybe its a bad idea. Since they won't be able to compete with wild colonies. Unless is close to my house and keep an eye on them onece in a while.

If I where to release any of mine, this is probably how I would handle it. And maybe drop them a small amount of food from time to time as a way to ween them off my assistance. But without being able to see all there members, I don’t think that there is a way to truely monitor there health.

[Vendayn]

There is also a tiny chance traveling into the desert or mountains or anywhere else by foot/car/plane, that the tires or shoes (or even the outside of planes as they travel to entire new areas!) pick up foreign bacteria or fungus or parasites or any other nasty things. That then transports foreign materials into new locations they otherwise wouldn't if people stayed inside all day and never went anywhere. 

 

The anti-release native ants (which I'll agree, non-native/invasive ants are a big no no) supporters need to practice what they preach and never go outside if they are so worried about spreading unknown pathogens. Otherwise that just means they are a huge hypocrites and not worth listening to. If they really cared about pathogens being spread into the wild, they wouldn't travel anywhere, but in a glass contained bubble.

Edited by Vendayn, May 14 2018 - 1:24 PM.

[Shifty189]

There is also a tiny chance traveling into the desert or mountains or anywhere else by foot/car/plane, that the tires or shoes (or even the outside of planes as they travel to entire new areas!) pick up foreign bacteria or fungus or parasites or any other nasty things. That then transports foreign materials into new locations they otherwise wouldn't if people stayed inside all day and never went anywhere.

The anti-release native ants (which I'll agree, non-native/invasive ants are a big no no) supporters need to practice what they preach and never go outside if they are so worried about spreading unknown pathogens. Otherwise that just means they are a huge hypocrites and not worth listening to. If they really cared about pathogens being spread into the wild, they wouldn't travel anywhere, but in a glass contained bubble.

I consider this kind of post naïve, and rude, And beyond that a strawman argument. To suggest that somebody walking down the road is the same as releasing a captive bred animal is ridiculous.

While in general I understand the premise of your statements, there are ways of expressing it without being so rude as dismissing other people’s point of View out right

[Vendayn]

 

There is also a tiny chance traveling into the desert or mountains or anywhere else by foot/car/plane, that the tires or shoes (or even the outside of planes as they travel to entire new areas!) pick up foreign bacteria or fungus or parasites or any other nasty things. That then transports foreign materials into new locations they otherwise wouldn't if people stayed inside all day and never went anywhere.

The anti-release native ants (which I'll agree, non-native/invasive ants are a big no no) supporters need to practice what they preach and never go outside if they are so worried about spreading unknown pathogens. Otherwise that just means they are a huge hypocrites and not worth listening to. If they really cared about pathogens being spread into the wild, they wouldn't travel anywhere, but in a glass contained bubble.

I consider this kind of post naïve, and rude, And beyond that a strawman argument. To suggest that somebody walking down the road is the same as releasing a captive bred animal is ridiculous.

While in general I understand the premise of your statements, there are ways of expressing it without being so rude as dismissing other people’s point of View out right

 

I don't listen to hypocrites. They say they are so worried about pathogens, but have no problem transporting pathogens every day by traveling. So yes, I 100% dismiss their arguments of releasing native ants, unless they practice what they preach and never travel again. 

Edited by Vendayn, May 14 2018 - 2:21 PM.

[Mortamir]

Oh boy. We all done?

[Vendayn]

In any case, releasing non-native species of any kind isn't good.

 

And the article says "

 foreign snakes threatens Britain's native reptiles"

 

so they aren't native snakes, so someone released them or they escaped. Very sad whoever did that or let it happen if they escaped.

 

And here is an article of the disease which the article talks about that was linked in original post

 

http://www.newsweek....us-could-757450

 

So, its a fungus and a piece of info in that link

 

We still don’t know as much as we would like to about SFD. For example, how does it spread? “It could be in the environment already, it could be transmitted by humans or even captive animals,”

 

 

so they don't know how it originates. Seeing it probably wasn't a problem before in the UK since it seems to be a big deal there, the non-native snakes must been infected by it and since they aren't native, probably introduced new and exotic diseases where it wasn't already.

 

And if it DID originate in captive animals, its a fungus...it can spread outside the enclosure if environment is right for it, so its a problem anyway to begin with.

 

Releasing non-native animals, whether it be insects or fish or reptiles or whatever it happens to be, is never a good idea. Its like in the colonial days, all the new and exotic diseases that wiped out so many of the native americans. In that regard, releasing non-native pets can seriously harm the ecosystem in many ways, not just by taking the ecosystem over but the exotic diseases/pathogens the animal could be infected with from its native habitat.

 

That famous youtuber for example released invasive ants, but even if they are everywhere, it can seriously harm the ecosystem. And the ants were really sickly to begin with, which is even worse. 

 

But still, to me, night/day difference from native ants caught locally (as in walking distance, because so many ants look similar but can actually be a different species) and releasing invasive/non-native/exotic ants. Even if the invasive ant is everywhere, releasing a colony of invasive ants is just going to make it much worse for the environment.

Edited by Vendayn, May 14 2018 - 2:48 PM.

[Martialis]

 

The anti-release native ants (which I'll agree, non-native/invasive ants are a big no no) supporters need to practice what they preach and never go outside if they are so worried about spreading unknown pathogens. Otherwise that just means they are a huge hypocrites and not worth listening to. If they really cared about pathogens being spread into the wild, they wouldn't travel anywhere, but in a glass contained bubble.

 

Nice strawman you've got there,

[Vendayn]

 

 

The anti-release native ants (which I'll agree, non-native/invasive ants are a big no no) supporters need to practice what they preach and never go outside if they are so worried about spreading unknown pathogens. Otherwise that just means they are a huge hypocrites and not worth listening to. If they really cared about pathogens being spread into the wild, they wouldn't travel anywhere, but in a glass contained bubble.

 

Nice strawman you've got there,

 

If someone is going to tell someone to do something or not do something, they should do it themselves. Otherwise its very hard to take them seriously.

 

In this case, its spreading pathogens as their argument of not releasing locally native ants. However, the very fact that ant keepers tend to have to travel for ants (and in general, people travel all the time for countless reasons) is spreading pathogens all the time. There is no difference. One has a tiny chance of spreading pathogens, the other (travelling) has a tiny chance of spreading pathogens.

 

A better argument they should do, is releasing native ants has a high chance of them being killed by ants in the surrounding area. Which is actually sad and vast majority of the time releasing ants just results in their death from either wrong environment, predators or other ants.

Edited by Vendayn, May 14 2018 - 3:12 PM.

[gcsnelling]

This sort of attitude is exactly one of the reasons why our worlds ecosystems are so screwed up. The attitude of "well there is no evidence it is a potential problem so lets not worry about it" is so very short sighted and foolish, *read stupid) If there is a chance of an issue why take any more chance than you have to. It is obvious that not all activities which have even the slightest chance moving a pathogen can be  is practical or even possible .Contrary to what one member has said it is not hypocritical to walk out your front door. What would be hypocritical is for someone to protest the practice then do it themselves. The following is copied out of a post made here on this very message board ( which sadly I can not relocate) regarding a colony of Tapinoma sessile which was released in a keepers yard. If the report is 100 percent accurate or even partially accurate it should a warning to be heeded.

 

 “To get started this colony (Tapinoma sessile) has done something amazing.  They are actually killing off the Tetramorium sp. E in my backyard! Anyway, the colony was actually was put in my yard by me. I got them from one of the GAN (Global ant nursery) farmers along with another colony. I didn't know what to do with them so I let them loose in my yard. When I released them they had 100+ workers and 5 queens. However they are probably at 100+ queens now (This is an estimate i could be completely wrong about the number of queens) and they are easily over 200,000 workers. I wouldn't care about these ants normally. However, they are killing off all of the other species in my yard. I know they've killed off 2-3 mature Formica colonies, a large Crematogaster colony and a Camponotus pennsylvanicus. (pennsylvanicus) colony. The Tetramorium colony was at about 10,000 workers when I released the Tapinoma colony. Now they are probably under 1,000. I'm not sure if I should try to kill the Tapinoma or not because they are native. I expect this colony to grow much more as they are only 1 year and 4 months old.”

[Vendayn]

Now, I do agree ants should be put in freezer as talking about in forum chat right now. But not because of pathogens that are spread daily by people traveling...but...

 

If putting the colony in the freezer, they die a "painless" "quick" death (argument of ants feeling pain or not isn't part of discussion, but just go with it, its why I put it in quotes)...

 

But releasing the ants (native mind you, invasive/non-native is always bad) they deal with countless problems as said in my post above. A vastly huge chance of them being slaughtered by other ants. But if that isn't an issue, they tend not to be able to make a colony in time to protect themselves from the weather. So, they end up suffering from cold (or heat, or dryness or whatever it happens to be). If there are no ants in the area, there is almost always a good reason for that to begin with. And if there are ants in the area, then the colony is doomed to suffer.

 

I do agree not releasing native ants, for that reason that they just end up suffering and being killed off. Or severely "stressed" and die. 

 

That can definitely not argue with. Pathogens is just a bad reason to me since people spread those all the time and no one starts talking about not traveling and living like hermits lol. But the better reason (to me) is simply that releasing an ant colony outside, even if caught locally, just I'd say 99% of the time ends with their death. Where as, the freezer at least is quick and "painless", and they'd certainly die anyway if released outside.

[Vendayn]

This sort of attitude is exactly one of the reasons why our worlds ecosystems are so screwed up. The attitude of "well there is no evidence it is a potential problem so lets not worry about it" is so very short sighted and foolish, *read stupid) If there is a chance of an issue why take any more chance than you have to. It is obvious that not all activities which have even the slightest chance moving a pathogen can be  is practical or even possible .Contrary to what one member has said it is not hypocritical to walk out your front door. What would be hypocritical is for someone to protest the practice then do it themselves. The following is copied out of a post made here on this very message board ( which sadly I can not relocate) regarding a colony of Tapinoma sessile which was released in a keepers yard. If the report is 100 percent accurate or even partially accurate it should a warning to be heeded.

 

 “To get started this colony (Tapinoma sessile) has done something amazing.  They are actually killing off the Tetramorium sp. E in my backyard! Anyway, the colony was actually was put in my yard by me. I got them from one of the GAN (Global ant nursery) farmers along with another colony. I didn't know what to do with them so I let them loose in my yard. When I released them they had 100+ workers and 5 queens. However they are probably at 100+ queens now (This is an estimate i could be completely wrong about the number of queens) and they are easily over 200,000 workers. I wouldn't care about these ants normally. However, they are killing off all of the other species in my yard. I know they've killed off 2-3 mature Formica colonies, a large Crematogaster colony and a Camponotus pennsylvanicus. (pennsylvanicus) colony. The Tetramorium colony was at about 10,000 workers when I released the Tapinoma colony. Now they are probably under 1,000. I'm not sure if I should try to kill the Tapinoma or not because they are native. I expect this colony to grow much more as they are only 1 year and 4 months old.”

Well like I said in the post above that I was writing when you replied, I still don't release even native ants. Most of the time they end up dying and suffering from other ant colonies or countless other things.

 

In this case, as your example...Tapinoma sessile are actually invasive in an urban environment, despite being native. So I'll agree there, releasing a native ant can sometimes make them invasive if put in a different environment. I've seen Tapinoma sessile get millions of ants in a period of two years. And they are native, but can become invasive if conditions are right.

 

So I agree with you, and that is a good point you brought up. Releasing a native ant does have a chance (and seeing for Tapinoma sessile it happens quite a bit, its probably a good chance overall)...they become invasive if put in conditions highly favorable to them that they'd otherwise not be part of. And then whoever that person was that released them ended up with an invasive (native) ant to deal with.

 

And I have a good example with that in mind.

 

I had Pheidole hyatti act pretty invasive in captivity when I had a colony some years back. Their colony grew massive in a very short time period, but I never once saw any colony of them outside get nearly that big that fast. So, they are a native ant that can probably become a huge problem if released outside after captivity, despite being native.

Edited by Vendayn, May 14 2018 - 3:30 PM.