Invasive Australian crayfish invading Texas water causing concern for wildlife
An invasive species of crayfish has invaded Texas waters, sparking grave wildlife concerns for conservationists.
Researchers in Brownsville, Texas, have been investigating reports of an Australian red claw crayfish, a crustacean that typically belongs 8,000 miles away after the species was seen pervading southern Texas waters, specifically the Rio Grande Valley.
The Rio Grande is a free-flowing natural river located in the southernmost tip of Texas that spans roughly 4,200 square miles across four counties. Around 196 miles of the river, which was designated by Congress in 1978 as 'the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River', meanders through stretches of breathtaking desert and canyons of stratified rock.
Texas Parks & Wildlife officials are concerned that the crayfish species is spreading quickly, causing havoc by outnumbering other native species that exist in the same water.
The Australian red claw is a large-bodied crayfish, distinctively recognized by its blue-green body with red and maroon highlights. When fully grown, the crustacean can reach a total length of around 10 inches and can weigh up to 1.3 pounds, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Typically, they can be found in tropical and subtropical climates, coastal streams, and freshwater environments, and favor slower-moving upper reaches of rivers as well as lakes and lagoons, according to experts.
At present, there are over 400 crayfish species that inhabit waters in the U.S. – a total that amounts to roughly 70 percent of the world's total species, according to Virginia State University.
Speaking on a PBS show aired Sunday about the concerns, University of Illinois' crustaceans expert Chris Taylor, said: 'The biggest threat that we know of for native crayfish species are invasive crayfish coming into new habitats and actively displacing them.'
Taylor added that one of the goals of the biological project in Brownsville was to 'assess that threat'.
'You can't overstate how important crayfish are. They are prey source for fish species, mammal species, [and] birds', said University of Illinois aquatic ecologist Dusty Swedberg.
'Everything is interconnected and [if] you start to lose some of those middle pieces in a food web, it's going to have an impact somewhere else', Taylor added.
Researchers have been monitoring the risk of competition that the invasive species poses to the native crayfish revealing that they were trying to see 'where they are, how many are there, [and] if they're successfully reproducing'.
Texas Parks and Wildlife Invertebrate biologist Archis Grubh said he was expecting to find at least '50 to 100' after researchers waded through the river.
However, he remained positive stating there were 'not as many in the resacas as I was expecting, so I think that's a good sign.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
Some fish feel excruciating pain for up to 20 minutes after catch, scientists find
Fish like the rainbow trout suffer 2 to 20 minutes of excruciating pain while they are harvested and killed for food, according to a new study. The research, published in Scientific Reports, reveals the hidden pain of fish during slaughter and offers solutions to improve their welfare. Researchers hope the findings can help improve the welfare of up to 2.2 trillion wild and 171 billion farmed fish killed every year for human consumption. In the study, scientists focussed on a common method of slaughtering fish called air asphyxiation. Animal welfare groups have flagged this method, which involves depriving fish of oxygen, as inhumane given the significant amount of time they take to lose consciousness in this process. Researchers found that rainbow trout endured an average of 10 minutes of intense pain during this process, with estimates ranging from 2 to 22 minutes depending on factors like fish size and water temperature. 'Based on a review of research on stress responses during asphyxiation, we estimate 10 min of moderate to intense pain per trout,' they wrote. The study cautioned that chilling fish in ice slurry after being caught could cause an even greater burden of pain. 'By slowing down metabolic processes, lower temperatures may extend the time to unconsciousness,' it noted. Looking at other interventions, researchers found that if implemented properly, electrical stunning could avert 1 to 20 hours of moderate to extreme pain experienced by fish for every US dollar spent on slaughtering them. Another method called percussive stunning, which involves dealing a blow to an animal's head with special devices, could kill fish quickly without much suffering but faced 'implementation challenges', researchers said, adding that other pre-slaughter practices like fish crowding during transport might cause even greater suffering. The study also highlights the use of the Welfare Footprint Framework, a method to quantify animal welfare by estimating the total time they spend in various states of suffering or well-being. It uses time-based values to subjective experiences for direct comparisons between different animal welfare interventions. "The Welfare Footprint Framework provides a rigorous and transparent evidence-based approach to measuring animal welfare and enables informed decisions about where to allocate resources for the greatest impact,' Wladimir Alonso, an author of the study, said. 'These findings provide transparent, evidence-grounded and comparable metrics to guide cost–benefit decisions and inform slaughter regulations and practices in trout.'
The Guardian
3 days ago
- The Guardian
Major US climate website likely to be shut down after almost all staff fired
A major US government website supporting public education on climate science looks likely to be shuttered after almost all of its staff were fired, the Guardian has learned. the gateway website for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa)'s Climate Program Office, will imminently no longer publish new content, according to multiple former staff responsible for the site's content whose contracts were recently terminated. 'The entire content production staff at (including me) were let go from our government contract on 31 May,' said a former government contractor who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. 'We were told that our positions within the contract were being eliminated.' Rebecca Lindsey, the website's former program manager, who was fired in February as part of the government's purge of probationary employees, described a months-long situation within Noaa where political appointees and career staff argued over the fate of the website. 'I had gotten a stellar performance review, gotten a bonus, gotten a raise. I was performing very well. And then I was part of that group who got the form letter saying, 'Your knowledge, skills, and abilities are no longer of use to Noaa' – or something to that effect.' Lindsey said she had been worried that might be a target of the new administration soon after the election, but when a large Noaa contract was up for renewal at the end of May, her former boss told her that a demand came 'from above' to rewrite parts of the contract to remove the team's funding. 'It was a very deliberate, targeted attack,' said Lindsey. Lindsey said the content for was created and maintained by a contracted staff of about 10, with additional contributions from Noaa scientists, and its editorial content was specifically designed to be politically neutral, and faithful to the current state of the sciences. All of those staff have now been dismissed, she said. 'We operated exactly how you would want an independent, nonpartisan communications group to operate,' said Lindsey, and noted that is housed within the science division of Noaa, not its public affairs division. 'It does seem to be part of this sort of slow and quiet way of trying to keep science agencies from providing information to the American public about climate.' Noaa has been contacted for comment. It's unclear whether the website will remain visible to the public. The site was housed within the Communication, Education, and Engagement Division of Noaa, which describes itself as 'the largest team in the federal government dedicated to climate communication, education, and engagement'. The website receives hundreds of thousands of visits per month and is one of the most popular sources of information about climate science on the internet. The fired staff believe the changes to were targeted by political appointees within the Trump administration and specifically aimed at restricting public-facing climate information. 'It's targeted, I think it's clear,' said Tom Di Liberto, a former Noaa spokesperson who was also fired from his position earlier this year. 'They only fired a handful of people, and it just so happened to be the entire content team for I mean, that's a clear signal.' The purge spared two web developers, which Di Liberto says is a concerning sign. The contractor said: 'My bigger worry, long-term, is I would hate to see it turn into a propaganda website for this administration, because that's not at all what it was.' The contractor said that while there will still be some pre-written, scheduled content posted on the site this month, there are no plans for further new content: 'After that, we have no idea what will happen to the website.' Lindsey said she also fears a 'sinister possibility' that the administration may co-opt to publish its own anti-science content. Lindsey said the administration could now 'provide a content team from the Heartland Institute, leveraging our audience, our brand, our millions of people that we reach on social media every month. That's the worst-case scenario.' ' is one heck of a URL. If you wanted to basically keep the website alive to do something with later, this is what you would do if you're the [Trump] administration,' said Di Liberto. 'It's clear that the administration does not accept climate science, so it's certainly concerning.' The cuts also mean that there is now also no one left to run social media accounts, which have hundreds of thousands of followers. Since staff in charge of did a lot of pushback on misinformation, their absence may help anti-science information flourish there more readily. 'We were an extremely well-trusted source for climate information, misinformation and disinformation because we actually, legitimately would answer misinformation questions,' said the contractor. 'We'd answer reader emails and try to combat disinformation on social media. 'We get attacked on social media by people who don't believe in climate change, and that's increased over the last six months or so as well.' The shutdown comes amid broader cuts to science funding across the government, including 'significant reductions to education, grants, research, and climate-related programs within Noaa', as stated in the 2026 'passback' budget Congress is currently deliberating. 'It seems like if they can't get rid of all the research, what they can do is make it impossible for anyone to know about it,' said Di Liberto. The contractor said they worry that what may have begun as a heavy-handed attempt by administration officials to limit public knowledge of human-caused climate change will have broader impacts on public education on the cyclical drivers of weather – as well as the results of publicly funded research conducted by Noaa scientists. 'To me, climate is more broad than just climate change. It's also climate patterns like El Niño and La Niña. Halting factual climate information is a disservice to the public. Hiding the impacts of climate change won't stop it from happening, it will just make us far less prepared when it does.'
The Independent
5 days ago
- The Independent
Wildlife declining in UK woods despite more tree cover, study finds
The UK needs to dramatically improve the condition and scale of its woodlands to tackle wildlife loss, according to a major report into the state of the UK's woods and trees. The paper, published by the Woodland Trust on Tuesday, found the quantity and variety of wildlife is plummeting despite a marginal rise in tree cover. This is due to the deteriorating ecological condition within UK woodlands, the environmental group said. Abigail Bunker, director of conservation and external affairs at the Woodland Trust, said findings show the UK's 'once rich, complex woodlands have become simpler and less biodiverse over time'. While woodland cover has increased from 13.2% of UK land area in 2020 to 13.5% in 2024, just 45% of the Government's woodland creation targets have been met by the UK over those years, the report said. To hit the UK's net zero targets, the authors cited the Climate Change Committee's assessment that current tree planting rates need to double by the end of this decade. Pulling together a range of different scientific studies, the report outlines findings that point towards a significant loss in woodland wildlife in recent decades. These includes a 47% decline in butterflies between 1990 and 2022, as well as a 37% reduction in the number of woodland birds in the past 50 years, and 15% in the past five. The population of dormice in surveyed woodland fell by 70% between 2000 and 2022, and the richness of different plant species has reduced by 22% over the past 50 years, more research found. And only one in 50 native woodlands were found to have more than one veteran tree per 200,000 metres squared, which are especially valuable to wildlife thanks to their damage and decay features that provide food and habitat. While approximately one quarter of all forest species depend on deadwood for their lifecycles, almost half (46%) have no deadwood at all, it was also found. Ms Bunker said: 'UK woodlands lack open spaces, such as glades, which allow light to reach the forest floor and young trees to grow. 'There are also fewer older trees, which, along with their soils, lock in carbon from the atmosphere. Alarmingly, many British woodlands have very few – if any – ancient and veteran trees left.' Other threats identified in the paper include 121 different species of pests which have been introduced to UK native trees, many from the international plant trade. The report predicts that climate change will allow these, and potentially other pest species to further thrive, to the detriment of British trees, with the UK spending an estimated £919.9 million per year managing only six of these pests. The Woodland Trust also warned that healthy woodlands are key to UK plans for tackling and mitigating the effects of climate change, such as flooding and sequestering carbon. Sensitive management of woodlands can help to make them more resilient to the escalating suite of threats, it added. Elsewhere, the report focused on the impact woodlands have on wellbeing and communities. It highlighted poll findings that suggest nine in 10 people agree woodland biodiversity has a positive impact through features such birdsong or the sound of rustling leaves. The richest woodlands for wellbeing were also found to be very unevenly distributed across the UK, with lower value woodlands found in more deprived areas Laura Chow, head of charities at People's Postcode Lottery – whose players supported the report, said: ' Trees and woodlands are a huge part of our nation's wellbeing and heritage, so it's fantastic our players were able to support this important report, which uses such a breadth of scientific evidence to reveal what we need to do to ensure UK woodlands survive and thrive for people and nature.' Ms Bunker said: 'We are calling on the Government and others to invest in the management of our woodlands, so that people and wildlife can experience the benefits of these precious ecosystems, particularly in mitigating the effects of climate change. 'It's also vital that the government start hitting their tree-planting targets, so that there is time to grow the veteran trees of the future and help shape woodlands to better withstand challenges like new diseases, or rising temperatures.' An Environment Department (Defra) spokesperson said: 'Trees are at the forefront of our plans to reduce emissions and help reverse biodiversity loss. 'This Government is investing up to £400 million in tree planting and peatland restoration over the next two years, and have announced the Western Forest as the first new National Forest in 30 years. 'We're also taking action to bring more existing woodlands into sustainable management, helping to restore nature-rich habitats and support wildlife.'
