A recent article in Fisheries explores the history and negative bias associated with the term “rough fish” which can refer to a host of native species like gars, suckers, and others. Native fishes provide many ecosystem and cultural services that benefit people: for recreation, as a food source, and maintaining water quality, among others. Seeing each member of the ecosystem as having value, rather than assigning some artificial value based on narrow perspectives, can have a significant influence on how we manage our resources. There is a growing movement to change the narrative about these native fishes which are often undermanaged and underrepresented. Replacing outdated negative terminology with more appropriate designations such as “underused fish” or “underrepresented native fishes” is a good place to start. But there is so much more work to be done to get where we need to be. We encourage you to read the article and start a conversation within your professional circles about ways we can play a part in shifting the paradigm on native fish conservation.   

In an effort to highlight some of the science involving these species, several of our Women of Fisheries colleagues recently shared their work on gars in the Lepisosteidae family. By sharing their stories, we hope it will inspire you to bring awareness about the value of these and other underrepresented native fishes and to advocate for better conservation practices.

Here are three papers we published on Longnose Gar:
1. Age, growth, and reproduction in two coastal populations of Longnose Gars
2. Mercury bioaccumulation in an estuarine predator: Biotic factors, abiotic factors, and assessments of fish health
3. Prey composition and ontogenetic shift in coastal populations of longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus

Virginia Shervette