Species Diversity of Wild Fish

I took particular interest in today's reading about protecting the Adirondack's populations of wild fish - both the brook trout and the round whitefish. A particular passage in Schneider stood out to me:

"It's interesting to contrast that with the sort of pop ecology of the moment that says we want to increase or maintain the diversity, which on the surface is usually interpreted to mean a lot of species. However, that is not the natural situation here. Naturally, there were very few species here." (p. 323)

This passage stood out to me because I am in an ecology class right now and could relate to the topic of species diversity. Often, the understanding behind this concept is that the higher the species diversity, the better. We have learned that as ecologists, it is our job to do our part in order to maintain or increase (like Schneider said) the diversity of a specific area. However, increasing the diversity may not always be the best, or most natural, option. This is the case in the Adirondacks. The issue is that non-native species of fish are being introduced in Adirondack water bodies and are outcompeting the native species, like the brook trout and the round whitefish. Some even have argued that the presence of non-native species can be more harmful to the native populations of wild fish than the effects of acid rain.

I liked how Schneider presented both sides of the argument on the introduction of native species. I had realized the harm that non-native species could cause to these wild fish species, but I was mostly unaware of the benefits they could offer. Often, we don't think about how non-native species could be advantageous in certain aspects. Introduced fish species often can often become very large, boosting fisheries and providing a great amount of food and recreation for tourists. Although it may not seem ecologically right on the surface, these non-native species could promote tourism and enhance the economy in the Adirondacks. Now, I'm not saying that boosting tourism and the economy should be valued over the ecological rights of the park itself - but it is one side of the argument that we can sometimes overlook quite quickly.